Jimurray Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 I pity you NCAA guys that have to apply this video with a judgement of the minute possibilty of the step being towards home, thus the second step in the delivery making it an illegal pitch. Except it seems the video is there because most NCAA umpires are not focusing on the minute direction of the stutter step and not calling an illegal pitch. This reminds me of the FED hand to the mouth on the rubber balk, written in stone and never to be changed. NCAA can not back off this interp. Egos would be damaged. Meanwhile as you watch the videos the rank and file haven't called such violations. Caution: NCAA umpires should not comment on this thread. You know why. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 On 3/27/2024 at 10:46 PM, Jimurray said: I pity you NCAA guys that have to apply this video with a judgement of the minute possibilty of the step being towards home, thus the second step in the delivery making it an illegal pitch. Except it seems the video is there because most NCAA umpires are not focusing on the minute direction of the stutter step and not calling an illegal pitch. This reminds me of the FED hand to the mouth on the rubber balk, written in stone and never to be changed. NCAA can not back off this interp. Egos would be damaged. Meanwhile as you watch the videos the rank and file haven't called such violations. Caution: NCAA umpires should not comment on this thread. You know why. All I'm going to say is...I just watched Mis. St/Fla and then Arkansas/LSU, and I can't tell how many pitchers I saw tonight set up in the windup with both feet perpendicular on the rubber, (or heels touching the rubber) then starting their windup by moving the pivot foot parallel on the front edge of the rubber, and free foot parallel in front of the pivot foot and then deliver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted March 30 Author Report Share Posted March 30 1 hour ago, Richvee said: All I'm going to say is...I just watched Mis. St/Fla and then Arkansas/LSU, and I can't tell how many pitchers I saw tonight set up in the windup with both feet perpendicular on the rubber, (or heels touching the rubber) then starting their windup by moving the pivot foot parallel on the front edge of the rubber, and free foot parallel in front of the pivot foot and then deliver. “In front” , could be sideways or towards HP. What is behind Bruns nitpick regarding this delivery? Which it appears the rank and file do not recognize. Bruns has done great work to clarify stuff for NCAA. I don’t understand this nitpick. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyg08 Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 Any videos out there publicly? Or noteworthy games where it has occurred/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 16 hours ago, Jimurray said: “In front” , could be sideways or towards HP. What is behind Bruns nitpick regarding this delivery? Which it appears the rank and file do not recognize. Bruns has done great work to clarify stuff for NCAA. I don’t understand this nitpick. agree 100% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBlue4u Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 16 hours ago, Jimurray said: “In front” , could be sideways or towards HP. What is behind Bruns nitpick regarding this delivery? Which it appears the rank and file do not recognize. Bruns has done great work to clarify stuff for NCAA. I don’t understand this nitpick. Maybe the NCAA should get smart for once, and use the NFHS version. If a pitcher's foot is parallel with the pitcher's plate, the pitcher is in the set. If the foot is anywhere else, he is considered to be in the windup. How simple can that be? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 5 hours ago, johnnyg08 said: Any videos out there publicly? Or noteworthy games where it has occurred/ Watch this instructor around the 2:20 mark where he talks about taking that first step forward instead of back or to the side. This is what NCAA is telling us to call an illegal pitch for taking this forward step, and then a second forward step in the actual delivery of the pitch. NCAA 9-1a The windup .........."The pitcher may not take a second step towards home plate with either foot in the delivery of the pitch. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 7 minutes ago, BigBlue4u said: Maybe the NCAA should get smart for once, and use the NFHS version. If a pitcher's foot is parallel with the pitcher's plate, the pitcher is in the set. If the foot is anywhere else, he is considered to be in the windup. How simple can that be? It's not about a windup vs. stretch. They're saying "two steps foward" from the windup is illegal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted March 30 Author Report Share Posted March 30 18 minutes ago, Richvee said: It's not about a windup vs. stretch. They're saying "two steps foward" from the windup is illegal. Sideways pitchers have an advantage over square pitchers in NCAA. The square pitcher has to take a stutter/rocker step in front of the plate to turn sideways in the delivery as your video shows. The sideways pitcher is already in that position. Why NCAA wants umps to birddog that stutter step eludes me. There is no momentum advantage. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoops Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 Very much agree. I don't see how there is any advantage gained by this. All they're doing is giving coaches something to get in our ears about. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 6 hours ago, zoops said: Very much agree. I don't see how there is any advantage gained by this. All they're doing is giving coaches something to get in our ears about. I haven’t had any coaches get a n my ear .. yet Probably because every team has guys throwing like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted March 31 Author Report Share Posted March 31 1 hour ago, Richvee said: I haven’t had any coaches get a n my ear .. yet Probably because every team has guys throwing like this. The problem is Randy doesn’t like and will be pissed if he sees you let it go. Have you seen the video? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Man in Blue Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 11 hours ago, zoops said: Very much agree. I don't see how there is any advantage gained by this. All they're doing is giving coaches something to get in our ears about. I don't know who Randy is, I don't know what video, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. But whenever people refer to the rulebook and use the term "advantage gained" . . . I would say it isn't about an advantage, it is about the way the rule was written. "Only one step forward" existed for decades without any issue. Now that somebody wants to do/teach something that is against the rule, we complain. While I may agree with your sentiment, the correct thing to do is to change the rule, not ignore it or bastardize it "because we want to." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted April 1 Author Report Share Posted April 1 3 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said: I don't know who Randy is, I don't know what video, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. But whenever people refer to the rulebook and use the term "advantage gained" . . . I would say it isn't about an advantage, it is about the way the rule was written. "Only one step forward" existed for decades without any issue. Now that somebody wants to do/teach something that is against the rule, we complain. While I may agree with your sentiment, the correct thing to do is to change the rule, not ignore it or bastardize it "because we want to." It's about how the rule is interpreted by the original people who wrote it, OBR. Back when the traditional windup was used the rule prohibited two steps forward "in the delivery". Once "square" windup pitchers started turning sideways to deliver OBR/MLB did not nit pick the wording of their rule because they considered it a repositioning step to sideways and not a second forward step during the actual delivery of the ball to the batter. "He shall not raise either foot from the ground, except that in his actual delivery of the ball to the batter, he may take one step backward, and one step forward with his free foot." Off Topic: Note that that wording does not allow breaking contact with the ground by the pivot foot except we all allow a lift and turn while understanding that that wording was intended to penalize "running into the pitch". Randy is Randy Bruns, rules interpreter for NCAA baseball, and you should spend the money to join the NCAA Refquest site for good rules clarification and video other than my issue with the stutter step and birddogging player celebrations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadMax Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 On 3/30/2024 at 3:12 PM, Jimurray said: Why NCAA wants umps to birddog that stutter step eludes me. There is no momentum advantage. It has to do with a R3 present. Any nitpicking of the minutiae of windup vs. stretch/set, and stutter steps, and free foot freezing, ad nauseam always has, at its root, the presence of a R3. Offensive-minded coaches want a defined, hard-lined point at which they can coach their R3s to go secondary lead and/or for the plate, without fear of a F1 abandoning, aborting, or worse (far, far, far worse) masking that pitching motion and it becoming a pickoff to 3B. Vice versa, pitching coaches want the latitude to coach their pitchers to make their pitching motions – whether that be windup or set/stretch – to be as effective and unembellished(?... in a style that doesn't tip what's coming) as possible. Hitting coaches are getting just as shrewd and intelligence-equipped as their Major League brethren, with indexed digital video footage at their near-immediate disposal. And surely, Randy Bruns doesn't want a crew to let it go early in the game, with nobody on base, only for it to become a problem in the top of the 9th, with the tying or go-ahead run on 3B. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted April 1 Author Report Share Posted April 1 2 minutes ago, MadMax said: It has to do with a R3 present. Any nitpicking of the minutiae of windup vs. stretch/set, and stutter steps, and free foot freezing, ad nauseam always has, at its root, the presence of a R3. Offensive-minded coaches want a defined, hard-lined point at which they can coach their R3s to go secondary lead and/or for the plate, without fear of a F1 abandoning, aborting, or worse (far, far, far worse) masking that pitching motion and it becoming a pickoff to 3B. Vice versa, pitching coaches want the latitude to coach their pitchers to make their pitching motions – whether that be windup or set/stretch – to be as effective and unembellished(?... in a style that doesn't tip what's coming) as possible. Hitting coaches are getting just as shrewd and intelligence-equipped as their Major League brethren, with indexed digital video footage at their near-immediate disposal. And surely, Randy Bruns doesn't want a crew to let it go early in the game, with nobody on base, only for it to become a problem in the top of the 9th, with the tying or go-ahead run on 3B. NCAA and OBR fixed sideways pitchers with the declaration. What would confuse a coach or R3 about the TOP with a square pitcher delivering as in @Richvee's youtube example. Have you watched video #5. If you had the legal and illegal pitcher in the same game and called it on the "illegal" pitcher, what do you think would happen when the "legal" pitcher pitched the next inning? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadMax Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 (edited) Here's the thing... if "we" (being TPTB) allow 2 steps, or toe-taps, then why not 3? If you limit it to just 2, then the F1 can or could vary, pitch to pitch, in doing 1 or 2, could he not? We've allowed up to 2, haven't we? Remember how I said coaches want a point at which an R3 can take secondary lead and/or go for plate? I might have been a bit sensational and fantastical in saying that a F1 will pick off a R3... but he sure can alter his pitch, thus throwing off the batter, or into a pitch-out at the plate, or something along those lines. Edited April 1 by MadMax Relevence was brought to attention 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted April 1 Author Report Share Posted April 1 25 minutes ago, MadMax said: I have! Very... illuminating, from a players' perspective. Here's the thing... if "we" (being TPTB) allow 2 steps, or toe-taps, then why not 3? If you limit it to just 2, then the F1 can or could vary, pitch to pitch, in doing 1 or 2, could he not? We've allowed up to 2, haven't we? Remember how I said coaches want a point at which an R3 can take secondary lead and/or go for plate? I might have been a bit sensational and fantastical in saying that a F1 will pick off a R3... but he sure can alter his pitch into a pitch-out at the plate, or something along those lines. I don't think you are grasping the issue. We are not discussing toe taps or other quirks. A windup pitcher no matter what his orientation, square, hybrid, sideways, is allowed one step backward or sideward. Is backward/sideward related to the rubber or the pitcher's torso? A sideways pitcher steps backword but it might be sideways. It's just a stutter step and we don't care. a Hybrid pitcher usually step toward 1B which is backwards, sideways, and forward to his torso but sideways to the rubber. A traditional square windup pitcher (haven't seen any lately) steps backward or sideways toward 1B. A square windup pitcher that wants to use the Youtube video delivery could be said to step forward and thus his next delivery step is also forward and by literal rule illegal except OBR allows it as it's not a delivery step. In Video #5 can you tell me the difference between pitchers deemed illegal with a forward step when the pitchers deemed legal with a "sideways" step also have a forward vector to their step and do you think if you called it on one but not the other in a game a coach would come out. I'm guessing the video exists is because the rank and file are not discerning the difference and are applying Evans precept. "That is not a practical way to umpire" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 5 hours ago, Jimurray said: The problem is Randy doesn’t like and will be pissed if he sees you let it go. Have you seen the video? Randy should be watching D1 pitchers doing it every weekend on ESPN+, SEC, ACC networks. When they stop, Maybe then I'll have a little bit of chance stopping a Juco kid on a Tuesday afternoon on some random ballfield in Nowheresville Pa. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin_K Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 This conversation reminds me of the sage advice @JonnyCat offered many moons ago. Use the rule book to solve problems rather than to create problems. Unless a HC brings it to my attention, I am going to have selective blindness to the feet and first step forward that seems to be problematic to the rules interpreter for the NCAA, especially in @Richvees Nowheresville. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 7 hours ago, Kevin_K said: especially in @Richvees Nowheresville You’ve been there, I’m sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoops Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 On 3/31/2024 at 8:49 PM, MadMax said: Here's the thing... if "we" (being TPTB) allow 2 steps, or toe-taps, then why not 3? If you limit it to just 2, then the F1 can or could vary, pitch to pitch, in doing 1 or 2, could he not? We've allowed up to 2, haven't we? Remember how I said coaches want a point at which an R3 can take secondary lead and/or go for plate? I might have been a bit sensational and fantastical in saying that a F1 will pick off a R3... but he sure can alter his pitch, thus throwing off the batter, or into a pitch-out at the plate, or something along those lines. I'm fairly dense, but I don't quite get what you're trying to argue here in regards to a step forward during the windup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSam21 Posted April 4 Report Share Posted April 4 The reason is, the pitcher doesn't have to do a rocker step to deliver from the wind up. They can just step straight to the plate. So if a pitcher steps forward for their rocker step... then steps forward in their delivery and only one step is allowed by rule... there is your problem. So by only allowing one forward step it allows us, and the batter, to determine when the pitch should be delivered. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSam21 Posted April 4 Report Share Posted April 4 On 3/31/2024 at 9:49 PM, Richvee said: Randy should be watching D1 pitchers doing it every weekend on ESPN+, SEC, ACC networks. When they stop, Maybe then I'll have a little bit of chance stopping a Juco kid on a Tuesday afternoon on some random ballfield in Nowheresville Pa. Isn't that what he is trying to do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted April 4 Author Report Share Posted April 4 28 minutes ago, JSam21 said: Isn't that what he is trying to do? The question is why. OBR doesn’t nitpick that rule and I can’t see any batter or umpire seeing the forward stutter step as a delivery step. He has used examples from NCAA games where the delivery was not penalized because there was no confusion and no advantage gained. Would that YouTube instructional video delivery give you or a batter any trouble? The problem with nitpicking the forward step is that many side steps have a forward component. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.