DWDIII Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 Coach pointed out that the pitcher, while on the rubber but definitely before coming set dumped the ball into the glove or out of the glove to the hand. He vocalized that it was a balk. I was plate ump but didn’t see it. He didn’t make a big deal, but discussed btwn innings. A balk? - because the ball was removed from the hand or glove? Help me out either way please. If I would / should have seen it, should I have balked it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 22 minutes ago, DWDIII said: Coach pointed out that the pitcher, while on the rubber but definitely before coming set dumped the ball into the glove or out of the glove to the hand. He vocalized that it was a balk. I was plate ump but didn’t see it. He didn’t make a big deal, but discussed btwn innings. A balk? - because the ball was removed from the hand or glove? Help me out either way please. If I would / should have seen it, should I have balked it? In the process of stepping on and getting comfortable on the rubber we would allow some transfer one way or the other. Once you deem the pitcher comfortable, he is only allowed to momentarily adjust the ball in his glove by interps in OBR, rule in NCAA and not in FED although I allow it without any complaints. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor Azul Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 Is this what you are asking about? 6.1.3 Situation E: With R1, F1 receives the ball from F2 and with the feet in set position stance and in contact with the pitcher's plate (a) nervously tosses ball in glove two or three times, or (b) removes the ball from the glove. RULING: This is a balk in (a) and (b). Restrictions on F1's movements begin when F1 intentionally contacts the pitcher's plate with the pivot foot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimurray Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 16 minutes ago, Senor Azul said: Is this what you are asking about? 6.1.3 Situation E: With R1, F1 receives the ball from F2 and with the feet in set position stance and in contact with the pitcher's plate (a) nervously tosses ball in glove two or three times, or (b) removes the ball from the glove. RULING: This is a balk in (a) and (b). Restrictions on F1's movements begin when F1 intentionally contacts the pitcher's plate with the pivot foot. The key words are "intentionally contacts the pitchers plate". While settling in the pivot foot will be in contact but we but we don't have intentional contact yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWDIII Posted March 31 Author Report Share Posted March 31 Senor Azul again!, yep. Thanks I missed that one. Hate that the coach called it and my field ump didn’t we’ll get ‘em next time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noumpere Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 9 hours ago, Jimurray said: The key words are "intentionally contacts the pitchers plate". While settling in the pivot foot will be in contact but we but we don't have intentional contact yet. Yep -- an example of "what they say isn't what they mean". If we took that phrase literally, there'd be a balk nearly every time the pitcher stepped on the rubber: The most common way is to stand to the side, put the pivot foot in the home in front of the rubber and then move the free foot to s spot in line (about) between the rubber and the plate before looking in for the sign. That's a step and a balk because the pitcher "intentionally contacted the rubber". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velho Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 10 hours ago, Senor Azul said: 6.1.3 Situation E: With R1, F1 receives the ball from F2 and with the feet in set position stance and in contact with the pitcher's plate (a) nervously tosses ball in glove two or three times, or (b) removes the ball from the glove. RULING: This is a balk in (a) and (b). Restrictions on F1's movements begin when F1 intentionally contacts the pitcher's plate with the pivot foot. Taking this literally (and why @noumpere says "what they say they don't mean"), how is F1 supposed to move the ball to his pitching after after catching it without "(b) removes the ball from the glove"? Seems like being in the set when catching the ball is the issue and "don't do that", no? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noumpere Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 1 hour ago, Velho said: Taking this literally (and why @noumpere says "what they say they don't mean"), how is F1 supposed to move the ball to his pitching after after catching it without "(b) removes the ball from the glove"? Seems like being in the set when catching the ball is the issue and "don't do that", no? I can't imagine F1 is ever "in the set" when he catches the ball, and it's not what the case play says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velho Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 13 minutes ago, noumpere said: I can't imagine F1 is ever "in the set" when he catches the ball, and it's not what the case play says. Ok, I was too precise. The case play says "with the feet in set position stance". So having the feet in set position stance while catching the return throw from F2 is the problem since the case play says you can't remove the ball from the glove if you've caught it while in that position. Puts Fed umps in a bad spot with coaches that are mostly worried about finding shortcuts to getting an edge. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noumpere Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 23 minutes ago, Velho said: Ok, I was too precise. The case play says "with the feet in set position stance". So having the feet in set position stance while catching the return throw from F2 is the problem since the case play says you can't remove the ball from the glove if you've caught it while in that position. Puts Fed umps in a bad spot with coaches that are mostly worried about finding shortcuts to getting an edge. The case play says: 1 hour ago, Velho said: With R1, F1 receives the ball from F2 and with the feet in set position stance If the play didn't have the word "and" I'd agree with you. The word implies (to me) that there was a distinction between the two actions of catching the ball and having the feet in the set position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velho Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 59 minutes ago, noumpere said: 3 hours ago, Velho said: With R1, F1 receives the ball from F2 and with the feet in set position stance If the play didn't have the word "and" I'd agree with you. The word implies (to me) that there was a distinction between the two actions of catching the ball and having the feet in the set position. I see what you're saying. Thanks. So if F1 gets the ball from F6 he can do those things? 🤣 Comes back to your "what they say they don't mean". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 1 hour ago, noumpere said: The case play says: If the play didn't have the word "and" I'd agree with you. The word implies (to me) that there was a distinction between the two actions of catching the ball and having the feet in the set position. Wouldn't that be " Receives the ball from F2, then positions his feet in the set position"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noumpere Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 14 minutes ago, Richvee said: Wouldn't that be " Receives the ball from F2, then positions his feet in the set position"? That would be better, but "rule books are written by gentlemen for gentlemen, not by lawyers for lawyers." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richvee Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 I'll stick with this in all levels. From the MiLBUM Prior to assuming the windup or set position, it is permissible for the pitcher to momentarily adjust the ball in his glove. In order for this to be allowed, the movement must be momentary in nature. If the pitcher has his hands together long enough that, in the judgement of the umpire, it appears that he has actually come to a set position or a windup position, then should the pitcher separate his hands a balk shall be called. and After coming to a legal pitching position, (windup or set), if the pitcher removes one hand from the ball other than in an actual pitch or in throwing to a base it is a balk. To me, with the set position, a pitcher is not "in a legal pitching position" until he has come set. Therefore, putting the hands together and apart quickly prior to coming set is nothing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Man in Blue Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 "Time! Catch, go tell your pitcher not to do that while he is touching the pitcher's plate." Yesterday, I had a kid in contact with the pitcher's plate, ball in hand. He wipes his nose on the back of his hand with the ball in it. "Time! Toss that one in, pitch. I've got a clean one for you." (And a Kleenex.) No rule against going to your nose. Don't look for reasons to allow stupid little things like this, just "don't do that." Yes, it is illegal. Don't try to parse the word "intentional" into something it isn't in an effort to excuse this. If you don't want to balk him for it (I wouldn't the first time with a kid), just "Time! Don't do that!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tborze Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 8 hours ago, Velho said: I see what you're saying. Thanks. So if F1 gets the ball from F6 he can do those things? 🤣 Comes back to your "what they say they don't mean". I first read it as noumpere saw it and then I saw your post. I went back and agree. Why else add “receives the ball from F2”. That’s not needed unless he was already engaged. Personally, I’d wait to see what F1 does next to determine/judge whether he was engaged or not. 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.