Set Position Taking Step with Non Pivot Foot

[Marcus6]

A few colleagues were discussing this while preparing for the state tourney. No runners on, RH pitcher uses the set position with his pivot foot parallel to the pitchers plate. Pitcher comes set and starts his motion with moving his left foot back (towards 1B). Is this an illegal pitch under NFHS? A balk with runners on? I can’t find a reference. Thanks.

[BigBlue4u]

When the pitcher is in the set position, with or without runners, he must come to a complete and discernable stop before delivering a pitch. (6-1-3)

[Marcus6]

2 hours ago, BigBlue4u said:

When the pitcher is in the set position, with or without runners, he must come to a complete and discernable stop before delivering a pitch. (6-1-3)

But he comes to a stop, then starts his motion with the left foot step back towards 1B to start his motion. Is this a balk/IP?

[Thatsnotyou]

This sounds like a wind up from the stretch, no? Which would make it illegal. 

[Jonump]

I have it as a balk as described, for the reason thatsnotyou stated. 

I had a version of this conundrum a few weeks ago in a JV game. P with pivot foot parallel would come set WITH his foot in a steppped-back-to-first base position, then would deliver the pitch.

Looked for all the world like a balk but I don't think it was. He just came set in a funny position.

But then sometimes he brought the foot back from that position to a more conventional set stance and then delivered, now I have it as windup out of the set position and balk. 

Took me a bit to process what I saw to be honest. I think I have this correct but would welcome comments

[Marcus6]

51 minutes ago, Jonump said:

I have it as a balk as described, for the reason thatsnotyou stated. 

I had a version of this conundrum a few weeks ago in a JV game. P with pivot foot parallel would come set WITH his foot in a steppped-back-to-first base position, then would deliver the pitch.

Looked for all the world like a balk but I don't think it was. He just came set in a funny position.

But then sometimes he brought the foot back from that position to a more conventional set stance and then delivered, now I have it as windup out of the set position and balk. 

Took me a bit to process what I saw to be honest. I think I have this correct but would welcome comments

Thanks for the responses so far:

This is what I am referring to:

 

[JHSump]

Doing a windup from the set position is definitely illegal. "Set position" = pivot fool parallel to the pitcher's plate.

It's an illegal pitch with nobody on base --- add a ball to the count on the batter.

It's a balk with runners on base.

In my association we try to catch the pitchers while they are throwing warm up pitches, correcting it then and there. Many have never been taught the correct NFHS set and windup rules.

[grayhawk]

Illegal in NCAA too. You can windup with your pivot foot parallel (with runners on base, you must notify the umpires), but you can't come set and then windup.

[Marcus6]

Understood I can’t find a reference or a case book example that says this is a balk/IP

[The Man in Blue]

Circa the 2020 rules book (the last one I have digital):

6-1-3

 

and 6-1-4c

 

 

EDIT to strikethrough previous comment: I was trying to find anything on the step specifically, but I came up empty.  The rules say surprisingly little on that.  I'll leave it to the case book experts . . . 

[The Man in Blue]

2018 Case Book (again, last one I have digital)

[Marcus6]

1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

I was trying to find anything on the step specifically, but I came up empty.  The rules say surprisingly little on that.  I'll leave it to the case book experts . . . 

This is my point and question: if he moves his non pivot back towards 1B (parallel to the rubber) to start his motion to deliver and does it all in one continuous motion, I don’t see any references that this is a balk or illegal pitch.

[The Man in Blue]

I just posted the two parts you needed.

He cannot set, and then go into a windup.  If he chooses to change, he must properly step off with his back foot.

Once he comes set, any lifting of the foot must go directly into a throw to a base or a pitch.  He cannot lift, step somewhere, set the foot down, and then lift again to go into a pitch.

[noumpere]

9 hours ago, Marcus6 said:

This is my point and question: if he moves his non pivot back towards 1B (parallel to the rubber) to start his motion to deliver and does it all in one continuous motion, I don’t see any references that this is a balk or illegal pitch.

That's a fake to first and / or failing to pitch in a direct / continuous motion (whatever the specific wording is).

[The Man in Blue]

4 hours ago, noumpere said:

That's a fake to first and / or failing to pitch in a direct / continuous motion (whatever the specific wording is).

From the case play:

If nonpivot foot is lifted after the stop, he must immediately pitch or step directly toward base and throw to that base.

From the set (which he was in as soon as he took a parallel position), that step towards first means he must throw to first (even though it was a backward step).

To address one of @Marcus6’s lines of thinking: Changing into a windup is NOT going into a pitch.  That is illegal under 6-1-3.

[Marcus6]

1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

From the case play:

If nonpivot foot is lifted after the stop, he must immediately pitch or step directly toward base and throw to that base.

From the set (which he was in as soon as he took a parallel position), that step towards first means he must throw to first (even though it was a backward step).

To address one of @Marcus6’s lines of thinking: Changing into a windup is NOT going into a pitch.  That is illegal under 6-1-3.

Thank you 

[JSam21]

On 6/7/2026 at 10:08 PM, Marcus6 said:

But he comes to a stop, then starts his motion with the left foot step back towards 1B to start his motion. Is this a balk/IP?

From the set position, the pitcher can do one of 3 things. 1) Deliver a pitch. 2) Step and throw/feint to a base. 3)Disengage.

Taking a rocker step isn't one of those three things. If he is delivering a pitch, he has one step to do so. 

[Jay R.]

For what it's worth, the Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association wants us to call this as legal.

I disagree but I'll call what my rules interpreter (and others confirming that the PIAA wants it) says to do.

[jimurrayalterego]

33 minutes ago, Jay R. said:

For what it's worth, the Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association wants us to call this as legal.

I disagree but I'll call what my rules interpreter (and others confirming that the PIAA wants it) says to do.

If you want to feel good about calling it as PIAA wants, just perceive the pivot foot 1 degree off from parallel. Does anyone not know how this pitcher will deliver based on runner config and address to rubber? 

[The Man in Blue]

On 6/10/2026 at 10:26 PM, Jay R. said:

For what it's worth, the Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association wants us to call this as legal.

I disagree but I'll call what my rules interpreter (and others confirming that the PIAA wants it) says to do.

Ultimately, we all work for our state associations, not NFHS . . . so . . . no issue if that is what they are re-writing the rule to say.