Illegal Pitch

it is a broad area but if a pitcher does it every pitch....no crime

I guess this is something I'd have to see. If the move looks as ugly as it sounds, I'm leaning towards balking the move. Ive seen a lot of moves and a lot of balks. If this is a move that only 2-3 players in the nation use, its needs to be looked at closely. If it was totally legal under NFHS codes then it would be widely taught. Ive never seen it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jonesin:
it is a broad area but if a pitcher does it every pitch....no crime

---

Doing something every time doesn't make it legal.

i agree bob....

if a pitcher pitches a way and doesnt change his form or motion and does the same windup or quick step from the stretch it isnt a crime....came across that, but if he does change it up sure its a balk....you cant take the true necessities away, but if its border line and he doesnt change it throughout the game then no crime.....reply back would love to learn more from your standpoint

Here is where you have a problem. "but if its border line"..........so who decides if its borderline?....the umpires of course.

If its borderline, then it becomes judgement. Any each umpire has his own judgement. It wont matter at that point if the last 2 umpires didnt think it was illegal when the 2 umpires today judge that it is.

I would not want to be doing something so radical that only 2-3 pitchers in the country are trying to get accepted as legal when it counts.

I may not be imaging this correctly. As I say, I'd need to see it. But it sounds like a duck.

piaa

good point...hard topic to debate i guess....but if he obviously balks everytime he throws then yes call it....mechanics make a pitcher...some pitchers have weird approaches to the plate that look like balks but are not....love your opinion .....really good point

A pitcher from Denton Texas has this same motion. It has been discussed thoroughly in Texas for 3 years and nothing has been done. He also pitched in the World Wood Bat, and has signed with University of Arizona. I think one of the keys is that his motion never varies.

My son's team faced him last night and there were 5 pro scouts with guns on him.

The player mentioned by coons2004 is Javier Guerra and plays for Denton Ryan High School. Though his delivery is controversial it has never been ruled illegal by the NFHS. If you want to see a video of his delivery follow this link and click on his name in the list. This is compliments of Perfect Game USA and requires RealPlayer 10 to view.

http://www.perfectgame.org/newplayers_list.cfm?tn=03national

"But the delivery has more than a couple of scouts and coaches questioning whether it is legal per baseball rules or not. At least one coach has sent in film to the NCAA for a ruling before he decides to start recruiting him. What he does is comparable to what a women’s softball pitcher does prior to release, except with a standard ¾’s release point. He takes a hard, big hop off his back (right) leg at the point when he starts coming forward in his delivery, lands hard on his front (left) leg and completes his arm stroke with his right leg probably a foot in front of the pitching rubber. While every pitcher looses contact with the rubber before he throws the ball, His action is so severe and exaggerated that there is little, if any, precedent for it at this level."

I looked at the video and took the above quote from the young mans profile. I would of course abide by any interpretation that the NCAA will rule on, but until that time. BALK....BALK....BALK.....

In my opinion this move is not pitching from 60'6" as governed by the rule book. This is a move to shorten the distance by at least a foot or more.

Dodgerdad, if this is the move your son is doing, I now do not have any question that I would balk it every time.

Balk, Balk, Balk!

You gotta try to stay in contact with the rubber. Most pitchers don't, true, but this is close to a crow hop!

Thanks for the replies... My son has the exact same delivery of
Javier Guerra.. Is this pitch has been ruled legal in Texas! How
about in California? I really need a quick response!!! Thanks...

c'mon EVERY pitcher leaves the rubber with back foot, only difference is stong rotators rotate off plate, linear pitchers go straight off just like this. Look at the toe drag; if u look at the mound after any game from LL up you will see
marks from the same motion 9/10 times. Look at video of pitchers, like u would if u were teaching a pitcher; ALL of them leave the rubber with the back foot, part ofg what their instructors/coaches look at is HOW they leave the rubber

Brown well off rubber at release

Not even close to the same thing. Yes, all pitchers leave the rubber as a result of the natural motion of pitching. But this is a deliberate movement to gain an unfair advantage. (my opinion).. BALK....BALK....BALK.

And I will add this.....Until a definitive approval comes from NFHS, NCAA or NAIA, the only opinion that counts is the Umpires.......Once approved, then I will happily agree that it is legal. Until then anyone who tries this with me gets Balked.

Ump thats ridiciculous. Its taking "unfair advantage" to try and throw the ball as hard as possible? Baloney. Taking steroids is taking unfair advantage, applying a foreign substance to the ball is taking unfair advantage, corking a bat is taking unfair advantage. This kid is exaggerating his push off the rubber. The reason its so evident and "ugly" is because its poorly timed and probably hampering his ability to throw harder.
Pitchinside:
"You gotta try to stay in contact with the rubber. Most pitchers don't, true, but this is close to a crow hop! "
NO PITCHER tries to keep his rear foot in contact with the rubber. For it to be a crow hop he would have to land on the post foot, with weight still back and then jump again.

I'm not an umpire, but that is the most obvious balk I have ever seen.

Just me,
It might be ridiculous to you from your point of view. In my opinion, (and its clearly labeled as such) this move is a balk, plain and simple. Your attempt to call it a "poorly timed" and "exaggerated push" off the rubber is like calling the Grand Canyon a ditch. Thats just too much simplification for me. A hop and a push are two different animals.

But, as an umpire, I will abide by any sanctioning body that will approve this move. So far I know of none who has. Its a balk to me.

As to your statement, "is it unfair advantage to try and throw the ball as hard as possible?" Of course not, it is however unfair advantage to try and shorten the distance from the 60'6" as set by the rules. And that is what I say it is.

Until such a time as this move is sanctioned, then the only opinion of this that matters is the umpires. I judge balks, so if your pitcher is using this move, be prepared for the balk call.

you need to move to Texas...from what I understand, lots of coaches have tried to argue that Javi's pitch is a balk and they get absolutely no where...maybe we need to send our umps to PA for school

maybe they otta just teach their teams to hit instead of trying to get the umps to win their games for them

This move has been studied and discussed in the state of Texas for 3 years. Since it has been studied by the UIL and is still not being determined as a balk, I would take that to mean that they are sanctioning it as a legal pitch.

Also in the PG World Wood Bat, I do not think that there were any balks called on this. Maybe the PG people can comment on this. Sometimes the absence of a call is the actual call. Meaning that the many umpires that have actually seen it in person have either not wanted to step out and make a decision, or have determiined it as legal.

I guess its a good thing for the young man that I dont umpire in Texas. I see it as a balk.

I do wonder how much advantage this motion provides. If a pitcher can throw 91-92 with this controversial motion, what would he throw with a conventional motion?

I'm curious about this - just as I was back when the Texas kid was doing it last year and it was being looked into. What balk rule does this motion violate? A lot of the time you'll hear people in the stands call for a balk anytime anything which looks "funny" happens, but I don't think that's the rule. Where in the rules do you find a basis for calling a balk on this pitcher?

Piaa WHY do you see this as a balk? By that I mean what rule does it violate? I dont ump that much but I have read the MLB rulebook and the (03) NCAA book and I cant see a basis for calling this a balk. NCAA says the pitcher cant take a running start or a step with the post leg but this is clearly not a separate step with the post leg

ha
pdog you type faster than me

again, I'll preface this as my opinion.

Under NFHS rule 6 section 2 article 4 d.
Article 4 If there is a runner or runners, any of the following acts by a pitcher while he is touching the pitchers plate is a balk.

D. Failing to pitch to the batter in a continuous motion immediately after any movement of any part of the body such as he habitually uses in his delivery.

I do not see this motion as continous I see it as 2 separate motions. The hop being a separate part of this delivery. Compared to a conventional delivery it clearly is (to me) not continuous.

That being said..I am for the third time saying that if and when it is sanctioned, I would be more than happy to call it legal. But my thoughts are that if it was legal and provided any real advantage to a pitcher that we would see it widely in the college and pro ranks. I have never seen it done live by anyone. Maybe if I did, I wouldnt see it this way.

Piaa I dont think that argument has a leg to leap on.

He's from windup, has turned sideways and the leap occurs as part of his motion with hand break. It is after leg lift but before rotation. It would not be possible for him to do anything other than deliver the ball to the plate.
Re advantage I think most coaches would see it as a fault, rightly or wrongly. My kid (LHP) is being told to d/c a similar , less extreme motion in his delivery, because his instructor feels it is detrimental. Who knows.
Also, as this is from windup, presumably there would be no runners on. Has to be continuous its in the middle of his delivery, could not possibly be construed as an attempt to deceive a runner even if it was from stretch with runners on.
Interesting tho. There was a major league signing a few years ago that threw like this . Cannot recall name. Anyone else know it?

My son is being forced to change his delivery or
it will be an illegal pitch! The ump states that the rule being enforced is that he is replanting his rear foot! But he is in a open position, his weight is forward, even if he drags his rear foot they say its a hop/jump?
With this delivery he has touched 97mph. They first tried to call it a crow hop but had to change thier call! They could not show a rule saying it was illegal, but stated if would probably be placed in the rule book... how can change a rule in the middle of the season? My son pitched Friday & went 8 inns With his old style pitching & was still hitting 91-93 in the 8th. Just because its different doesn't mean its wrong!!!

I dunno. I was going to say that It does when little minds think that it should, and that I especially liked the fact they cant actually find a rule that is violated.
But then I realized that I havent actually seen your sons delivery, just the other young man in the link above. So hey they have seen it and I havent so their view is at least informed whereas mine is conjectural. If you think it is the wrong decision appeal if possible, otherwise move on and adjust the motion, Afterall its just another judgement call, really. How about if he keeps the leap just doesnt let the foot touch down again?
ANy chance of you posting a clip or a link showing the motion in question?
Say Piaa does it actually say in the rule book that you cant "replant" the foot? Even the foot draggers usually rotate the foot up and around eventually.

I am a high school umpire in a chapter that umpires some of the Denton Ryan kids games. I have never umpired a game pitched by this kid but have first hand knowledge since I have a son, his age, who has played against him in the select summer leagues. First of all let me say this kid is very talented. IMO, he could change his delivery to the more conventional method and still be just as effective. But as coons2004 has said his delivery, in 3 years, has never been ruled illegal by the powers to be i.e. NFHS, TASO or UIL. But also, I might add, they have skirted the issue by never saying it was legal either. In other words, they avoid the issue. I believe it may be because this kid graduates this year and they avoided the issue so as not to affect his ability on the mound. I think this delivery may be addressed specifically in the coming seasons.

I believe the delivery to be a BALK! The reason, partly because of what has been stated already on this thread but also I believe the intent of the rule of pitching from the windup position is to maintain contact with the pitchers plate with the pivot foot until one continuous motion causes you to lift the pivot foot off the rubber. I believe the hop negates this continuous motion and places the start of the deliver some 12 to 15 inches in front of the plate. Let me also add there are a number of umpires in our chapter that see this motion as being continuous and don’t believe it to be a balk. Bottom line it’s a gray area. Until this delivery is specifically ruled upon it WILL NEVER be called a balk in the State of Texas.

The NFHS, TASO, UIL or whoever should step up and make a ruling. I really don’t care but I will say if it’s ruled legal it will be taught by coaches in the future. It not only increases body momentum which translates into a slight speed increase but also is very disconcerting to the batter seeing the whole body jump at you. I’ve studied it many times from the batters perspective and believe me, it does make a difference. ADVANTAGE PITCHER!!

This pretty much goes along with my thinking as well, Im glad to have an opinion from someone who has seen it.

I feel that the NCAA will rule on this. I've never seen this motion in a college game.

Follow this link to the S E T P R O public forms. It shows the pro pitcher, Craig House, who is the fella I was trying to think of. His motion is very similar and apparently, MLB legal.
same delivery in SHOW

HA! link wont work because the word s e t p r o is censored on this site. Must be some history here I dont know about.
Anyway if you wish to view clips of Craig House 's delivery which is essentially the same as this in terms of the leap visit the set pro
public forms Throwing mechanics, Instruction and training Debate forum. Its in a thread called Tiny Minds.
Really quite interesting as to how similar the deliveries are; some of the posters there relate that House had control problems with this delivery
Note go to no spaces http://www.s e t p r o.com/forums/index.php and select the throwing mechanics and training debate forum

Must be a balk.

Well, looking at the clips on that "other" site, two things are clear: 1) It is a continuous motion; and 2) It's not a "hop" followed by a pitching motion. The key is to watch the right foot - it doesn't "plant" a second time - it's being dragged along by the pitching motion (toe down.) Interesting. Although it looks "different", I can't see anything which would trigger a balk call under the rules.

I agree with piaa_ump. It looks like a balk to me. I have studied the video over and over a few times. He might gain a few mph if he goes to the conventional method of pitching. And I would also agree that the "hop" towards the pitcher would be gaining an advantage.

(g) The pitcher makes any motion naturally associated with his pitch while he is not touching the pitcher's plate;

Seems lke a no brainer here, the kid "posts" twice, once in contact, once while in front.

Pitch did you look at the clip?

Long time visiters to this forum will remember a discussion about a player that we named aptly "Skippy". Nothing was determined about his pitch legality but I dought that you would see this pitch at the next level. Have seen this pitch delivery once and thought that it might be illegal because the back foot actually was planted twice. When I saw this kid pitch, it was never ruled upon as a balk.

Interesting dicussion though.

Justme,
Yeh I watched, and yeh I asked my son (pitcher) what he thought, he said it was a legal delivery.

Question: If this is a legal move, what rule would you use to defend it? I don't get it (not the first time).

Seriously though, if it is a legal pitch, what would stop a guy from taking a "step" before he throws? Or getting a running start (ie. Cricket hurler) as long as you touch the rubber on your way to the plate?

Look at the tape. He doesn't replant his back foot before delivery - he's dragging it toe down. (I thought he was replanting at first - you have to focus on his foot to see that he's not.) If he replanted there's no question you "balkers" would be right. But he's not, it's just a long, high toedrag - a couple inches off the ground, but dragging nonetheless. I don't see a balk.

Differences of opinion, p-dog, are what makes this site worth checking every day.

Now, thats being said, nothing you've said convinces me your right and Im wrong. I dont see it as continous motion.

FWIW, I haven't seen the kid pitch this year, but a coach in that district told me he has made significant changes to his delivery.

Another interesting fact is that he pitched all the way up to the state tournament last year, so obviously some of the states best umps saw him.

Every coach I've talked to feels it's a balk, except his coach of course. But if he throws 90+, would you expect any differnet answers?

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.

Pitch i cant type that well. I dont think it needs a rule to defend it; I think it falls withain all of the rules that define a legal delivery. I dont think you can find one rule/definition that it does not meet. Prove me wrong.
Piaa I know you dont like it, I dont like it either. BUT just because you dont like it doesnt mean its not continuous. Where does he stop? I have looked at it frame by frame and there is no place,in 30 frames per second, where he is not in continous motion. What did you think of The Rockies' House's motion? Do you see it as not continuous?

An umpire in Texas must be reading this website. I was told that Tuesday, Javier was called for 4 no-pitches and 4 balks. It evidently shook him up because he also hit 4 batters and had several walks in 2+ innings. This resulted in a 5-2 loss, his first in HS since 2002.

a MLB pitcher who kinda jump off the mound is the Rocket Roger Clemens, he does a little hop if you watch. If i was an ump thought, i wouldn't change a pitchers motion unless hes doing something like a crow hop

Just me,
I post on here as an umpire, so this is where we differ. You say, "Piaa I know you dont like it, I dont like it either. BUT just because you dont like it doesnt mean its not continuous"

But again, as an Umpire, I am the judge. its my opinion that counts. And I am just posting what I would call facing this delivery.

On other topics in the HSBBW, I post as a fan or as a dad of an '04. But in here, Its umpire only. Calling a balk per the rules relies heavily on umpire judgement. Judgement is the sole non protestable thing in baseball. In this case I adjudge this to be a balk.

It would seem that there are people on both sides of the fence, but that wont help me in the game when Im the UIC. I dont have the luxury of a lifeline. I have to trust what I think, what Ive experienced over the past 20 years and my learned rule knowledge.

I havent changed my mind. But it has been quite a good discussion. However from this NFHS Umpire....until such time as it is definitively approved...........BALK.

I've watched Roger Clemens for years, his delivery is nothing like what we are talking about on this thread.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Just Me:
c'mon EVERY pitcher leaves the rubber with back foot, only difference is stong rotators rotate off plate, linear pitchers go straight off just like this. Look at the toe drag; if u look at the mound after any game from LL up you will see
marks from the same motion 9/10 times. Look at video of pitchers, like u would if u were teaching a pitcher; ALL of them leave the rubber with the back foot, part ofg what their instructors/coaches look at is HOW they leave the rubber

http://hitting.0catch.com/Keven_Brown.mpeg

---

I disagree. I slowed it down and Kevin Brown's toe is only about 2 inches off rubber and still on ground when he releases the ball.

Piaa did you look at the clip of Craig House? What do you think about his motion?
WRT this kid, if you are making a judgement that it is a balk then you are judging that he is in violation of one of the pitching rules. Which one? If you are still thinking in terms of it not being a continuous motion then, to maintain consistency with your position, you need to show that it is not continous. Where does he stop? This isnt the dark ages anymore. Radar guns, 30 or 60 or 100 frame/sec video is a fact of life, just as are the cameras that MLB is using to monitor the Strike zone and the umpires ability or willingness to call the true strike zone. Now thats the ultimate judgement call, ball/strike and the umps are being held accountable for their judgement. The same standard should be set for anyone calling a balk on a pitcher. Saying I am an experienced ump so that when I say white is black it is just doesnt cut it any more.
So if its a balk show what rule it is in violation of. If its not a continuous motion show me where his motion stops.

Jeff So we know that 2 inches off the rubber is OK according to you. Is 4? 6? 24?. C'mon be consistent in your argument. Its gotta be either on or off. Pregnant or not. Not a litlle bit off is OK but a little bit further off isnt. A little pregnant is still pregnant.

I appreciate all the replys but he changed his
delivery. We had the head umpire come out & check his delivery, we tried dragging the toe & was told no its illegal, due to the hop/jump, were also told it was not continuous, he then tried to drop & an drive they didn't care how far off the rubber he was as long as he doesn't hop/jump. He is working on this still & has been as far as 24" from the rubber. The ruling was as long as he drags his toe it would be ok.
He threw a 1 hit shut out, but will receive complaints as he finds his new delivery mechanics! Any comments about leaving the rubber Pedro Martinez releases at the same point as Roger Clemens, How does this happen unless you leave the rubber?

Just Me. I am a stickler. Off is off. I was making a statement that Kevin is not 1 foot off and there is some question whether he is off or not. The rules are clear. I don't know why the big argument. The rules clearly say you must pitch while in contact with the rubber. As an umpire, I would move and see the angle if a coach argued and at that point make a call. AS an opposing coach, I would make the umpires make a call. Either it is legal or illegal. And I know several highly known high school coaches in Georgia who would make their pitcher pitch from 1 foot away on the first pitch to make the umpires make a decision. Don't always agree but we as umpires make things difficult when we don't make calls according to the book.

Just me,
"This isnt the dark ages anymore. Radar guns, 30 or 60 or 100 frame/sec video is a fact of life, just as are the cameras that MLB is using to monitor the Strike zone and the umpires ability or willingness to call the true strike zone. Now thats the ultimate judgement call, ball/strike and the umps are being held accountable for their judgement. The same standard should be set for anyone calling a balk on a pitcher. Saying I am an experienced ump so that when I say white is black it is just doesnt cut it any more.
So if its a balk show what rule it is in violation of. If its not a continuous motion show me where his motion stops."

Here is your quote. I know you would like to have the rule book to have all the answers and every situation matched up with a hard and fast rule. Problem is baseball isnt like that, ever was and never will be.

Baseball is all about Umpire judgement, is he safe is he out, did he leave early, did he balk, did he catch the ball, did he miss the base, did he slide maliciously.......all these things have rules attached to them, BUT rely solely on the Umpire on the field to determine if they apply.

Please don't tell me about modern Radar guns, 30 or 60 or 100 frame/sec video being a fact of life. It isnt happening (and will never happen) on any level lower than big time College or MLB.

I umpire teams where the field is carved out of a pasture and the dugouts are sections of telephone pole with a 2"X 10" nailed to the top serving as benches. Ive had to dig into my bag to get baseballs when the teams didnt have any new baseballs. Where will anyone find the money for your technology? Besides the fact that it being used is against the rules?....Rule 10-1-art 5 " the use of videotape or equipment by game officials for the purpose of making calls or rendering decisions is prohibited"

You say the same standard should be set for anyone calling a balk on a pitcher. Saying I am an experienced ump so that when I say white is black it is just doesnt cut it any more.

Sorry, but it does. I am the one who applies the rules, I determine what a balk is, its no different if I say a ball is a ball or safe is safe or catch is a catch. It is what an umpire calls it.

We will not agree on this motion as being legal. I see it as a balk, you dont. Fine, thats what makes this a great discussion between us.......but in the final analysis, It would be a balk if I was the UIC, because I called it a balk and even if the pitcher, his coach, his dad or any fan does not think so, my opinion is the only one that matters, based on the authority of the rule book.

Best regards,

Justme,

Sorry, I can't let this go....

My son, in reposnse to a question about what a strike was, said "A strike is whenever an umpire calls one". I thought first he was trying to be smart mouthed, then, I thought "Geez, that's exactly right"!

So what PIAA said is true, a balk is when he calls one! It needs to be based upon a rule though..... So here-

Rule 8.01 (a)(a) The Windup Position. The pitcher shall stand facing the batter, his entire pivot foot on, or in front of and touching and not off the end of the pitcher's plate, and the other foot free. From this position any natural movement associated with his delivery of the ball to the batter commits him to the pitch without interruption or alteration. 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.

Glad to hear this very talented young man is changing his delivery, it will take time, but in the long run it will be good for him. I think that in chaseing a dream, the fewer the obstacles that you have in the way, the better. Like it or not, his delivery can be seen as an obstacle (apparently has caused some questions with respect to recruiters) and should be removed from the realm of consideration.

If any other pitcher does the same, or close to the same thing, I'd try to advise changing. It would be easier to change it at an earlier age, but can be done when older too.

By the way, I do see this as continueous, but he is raising his foot (through a rather "forceful" knee kick, which in turn, raises his foot from the ground).

Pitch for a minute I thought you had me BUT that part of the rule relates to How a pitcher can come off the rubber ie step off or pick. It does not define what is a legal motion, and in fact, subsequent subsections go on to define just exactly how he can step ( which requires raising the foot from the ground) with either foot. Text in brackets in 1 and 2 below is mine:

Quote:

a) The Windup Position. The pitcher shall stand facing the batter, his entire pivot foot on, or in front of and touching and not off the end of the pitcher's plate, and the other foot free. From this position any natural movement associated with his delivery of the ball to the batter commits him to the pitch without interruption or alteration. 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. When a pitcher holds the ball with both hands in front of his body, with his entire pivot foot on, or in front of and touching but not off the end of the pitcher's plate, and his other foot free, he will be considered in the Windup Position. The pitcher may have one foot, not the pivot foot, off the rubber and any distance he may desire back of a line which is an extension to the back edge of the pitcher's plate, but not at either side of the pitcher's plate. With his "free" foot the pitcher may take one step backward and one step forward, but under no circumstances, to either side, that is to either the first base or third base side of the pitcher's rubber. If a pitcher holds the ball with both hands in front of his body, with his entire pivot foot on or in front of and touching but not off the end of the pitcher's plate, and his other foot free, he will be considered in a windup position. From this position he may:

(1) deliver the ball to the batter, or

(thus he can go from windup into his delivery(duh) and, if this is his normal delivery, and its continuous, its legal)


(2) step (WITH THE LEAD FOOT) and throw to a base in an attempt to pick off a runner, or

(3) disengage the rubber (if he does he must drop his hand to his sides). In disengaging the rubber the pitcher must step off with his pivot foot and not his free foot first. He may not go into a set or stretch position - if he does it is a balk.

ALSO: note that this text refers only to the windup position. There is no such language in the set position 8.01(b) so even by the interpretation you put on this language in the windup position it would be legal from set position.

PS I agree with "Glad to hear this very talented young man is changing his delivery, it will take time, but in the long run it will be good for him. I think that in chaseing a dream, the fewer the obstacles that you have in the way, the better. Like it or not, his delivery can be seen as an obstacle (apparently has caused some questions with respect to recruiters) and should be removed from the realm of consideration."
Besides its still ugly.

Piaa'Ump u cant hide there. There is , demonstrably, the money to do this because it has been video'd and posted and you have seen the video. Soooooo, if you were now to ump a game that this kid pitched in you would, in fact, know that the motion was continuous, which was your point of infraction I believe. As an ump of principle you would need to make the right call. Also there is no HS game or youth game played in America in these days that doesnt have the potential for multiple video cameras in the stands and dugouts, and we need to be aware of this. Any clip can be posted to the web. Rodney King etc.
I dont have any argument with the UIC making his call during a game and that being the end of the issue, in that game, right there. You are right that is baseball etc etc. (who is going to win THAT argument anyway!) However, when the issue is raised in a forum such as this I think we should make an attempt to find out what is actually happening in the motion and if it is, in fact, in violation of any rule. If it isnt we should say so; if it is we learn how its illegal in a way that matters ie can be seen and taught etc. Its all about learning and teaching, right?
I also think that the route chosen by the conference in which the kid in question pitches is the correct one; IE have the Chief umpire or a designated official make a Ruling after an examination. Settles the point. Establishes precedent and lets all involved know where they need to go. Having said that I think THE RULING should involve the use of the best info possible and should be required to be clear and precise as to what rule is violated.
Fun Thread really.

Ok, one last thing.....I wont use video, its not permitted per the rules. But, and here is where we will meet in the middle....

"have the Chief umpire or a designated official make a Ruling after an examination. Settles the point. Establishes precedent and lets all involved know where they need to go."

"As an ump of principle you would need to make the right call"...If we have a ruling from a designated official, I will call it that way regardless of my personal feelings.

Previously in NFHS rules, we umpires used to have to call out any player that missed a base, without an appeal by the defensive team. I never agreed with this, as I thought an Umpire should not be part of the defense. Of course now that rule has changed. But I did enforce it.

Justme,
Why would it say "He shall not raise either foot from the ground" if they didn't mean it? And why, from the wind-up, would you want too?

Is he, or is he not, raising his foot?

Pitch you tell me. If they meant it why did they then go on to contradict it in subsequent subsections?
I am not sure that he actually does lift his foot, except in that it obviously clearly leaves the ground after toe drag, as his hips rotate thru, but then so do all other pitchers.
Note also that I see no evidence of a "hop and jump" that others refer to; note also that the kid in the link is not the actual kid described by the original poster but rather one that was linked as a "just like this example". Makes me wonder just how similar the 2 boys' motions are.

Pitch
So do you think this motion ( the linked video clip we can actually see) is OK from Set position?

No, he still raises his foot (through a very vigourous leg kick) and then replants/ retouches it. And it's not a drag, which is pretty normal near the release point.

Which section contradicts?

Pitch are u talking about the Geurra boys clip as linked on page 1 by Pantherproud? Cause if you go there and download the Perfect Game clip its pretty clear that he does NOT raise the foot. He pushes off the rubber and you can see the toe drag...dirt is thrown up by the dragging of the toe. There is no hop or "replanting" or second push; there is only the one push from the rubber.
Sec 2 and 3 clearly describe how to lift either foot, with the sec 2 portionclearly describing lead foot action different from that allowed in(a)
You never answered as to +/- balk from set position

Sure I did, I said no.

And yeh, that's the clip I'm talking about, but like said, the foot comes off the ground, don't think it's by levetating, but even if it is, it's still being "lifted" off the ground.

Opps... No, not legal.

Well then. Just to keep in the (recent) spirit of the HSBBW I should probably call you rude names
However, I wont. BUT methinks you must be blind if you cant see his toe dragging
I wont post anymore if you wont!
Just Me

NO MAS! NO MAS!