MLB rules, bases loaded, pitcher in the stretch, pivots on the rubber to make a pick off at second. No one at second base so the pitcher throws to F4 in his normal position 15 feet or so from second base. Second baseman is making no move in the direction of second base,
Replies sorted oldest to newest
It's not a balk because the pitcher is not required to throw the ball at all. To first or third he must throw to the base, but since there is no requirement to throw the ball, he cannot balk this way.
Does it matter which way the pitcher pivots?
Does it matter which way the pitcher pivots?
No, unless, if pivoting to his left (RHP), he lifts the front leg like the start of the delivery.
This is one of those tricky situations that really isn't addressed in the rule book. So you have to use judgment as the situation develops. In other words, if the fielder is in the process of covering the base then don't call anything. But if he's just standing there, then call it. What you have stated has happened to me and by the NFHS rule book I don't have to call it a balk (NFHS Case Book: 6-4-2, Situation E). But, having had this happen now three times I'm going to call it. Because the pitcher doesn't throw to the base because the F4 or F6 doesn't cover the bag, so it's a defensive screwup and I'm going to punish them for screwing up.
As far as MLB, in our high school association we have a guy that is calling pro. Yeah, he helps us out. Anyways, they told him at MLB Umpire School to call it a balk if it's NOT within a couple feet of the base. So you've got a window about 5 feet wide and if it's NOT in that window then call it a balk.
I'm not sure how you justify calling a balk, Preston. There is NO RULE under which you can balk this. The rule book covers situations which ARE balks, not situations where you "don't have to call it a balk" but may choose to do so anyway. Your second paragraph is true for throws to FIRST and THIRD.
Because it was on a TEST and I my answer... BALK! was correct. So that's how you call it a balk. If you have more questions, ask Mr Brewer and Mr McGriff because it was their test. That's why it's a balk.
Preston Davis posted:Because it was on a TEST and I my answer... BALK! was correct. So that's how you call it a balk. If you have more questions, ask Mr Brewer and Mr McGriff because it was their test. That's why it's a balk.
I'm thinking you may be mis-remembering the question, because this is by no stretch a balk. When asked why something is a balk, "because it said so on a test" isn't the correct answer. We need a cite on a rule that would allow this to be called a balk. I'm not trying to provoke you, it's just that no one who reads this post needs to get the wrong idea that this is a balk - it isn't.
6-4-2 Situation E: "...in the judgment of the umpire..."
And in my judgment... "It's a balk."
And it was on the test, and I got it right.
Again, thank you for playing.
Preston Davis posted:6-4-2 Situation E: "...in the judgment of the umpire..."
And in my judgment... "It's a balk."
And it was on the test, and I got it right.
Again, thank you for playing.
Please, please, please! A rule that makes it a balk? I am assuming you are taking a situation from the NFHS rule and case book. I will also assume you mean 6.2.4 and not 6.4.2. What year and could you please quote the entire not for situation E?
Preston, again you are incorrect. If a throw is more towards an occupied second base than it is to first or third, it is considered a move to second base. What you are remembering from your former pro-school colleague is that if it's within a few feet of 2B, it's a throw, if it's not, it's a feint to 2B.
Balks are like pornography...you know it when you see it!! One great thing about have 2 sons who are very alert players but not base stealers is balks seldom, if ever, matter in my house!!
old_school posted:Balks are like pornography...you know it when you see it!! One great thing about have 2 sons who are very alert players but not base stealers is balks seldom, if ever, matter in my house!!
I don't see it that way. If an ump calls a balk, he better have a reason other than "in my judgment" or "I don't know - it just looked funny." Balks are specific violations of specific rules. Any balk is related to a specific rule.
As ROOTHOG66 asked, what year case book are you referring to? The 2015 Case Book for 6.2.4 Situation E deals with the play when F wheels and fakes a throw while the SS and 2B dive pretending it's an errant throw.
Or, could you post the whole case and not just the "..in the umpires judgment.." part?
From a coaching stand point I would Black List any who called this a balk, even if it benefited me. Yes, to umpire you should know the rules, but with that said you should have a feel for the game itself and if an umpire called this a balk this would tell me they have ZERO feel for the game and all they did was memorize a rule book!
First off, this is the actual MLB interpretation:
The pitcher shall be charged with a balk if, while in contact with the rubber, he throws to the first baseman who is either in front of or behind first base and obviously not making an attempt at retiring the runner at first base. However, there is no violation if the pitcher throws the ball directly to first base in this situation. Also note that there is no violation if the pitcher attempts a pickoff at second and throws to an infielder who is in front of or behind that base base (i.e., this violation is only in reference to pick-offs at first and third base).
Note that it is legal to throw to a middle fielder not in the vicinity of 2B.
I'm also curious as to what umpire works MLB and is in a HS association as well.
roothog66 posted:old_school posted:Balks are like pornography...you know it when you see it!! One great thing about have 2 sons who are very alert players but not base stealers is balks seldom, if ever, matter in my house!!
I don't see it that way. If an ump calls a balk, he better have a reason other than "in my judgment" or "I don't know - it just looked funny." Balks are specific violations of specific rules. Any balk is related to a specific rule.
Any solid Ump will never say it looked funny, there is virtually no argument for he "he flinched" have seen many times, it looked funny, everyone know its, balk called...play on.
old_school posted:roothog66 posted:old_school posted:Balks are like pornography...you know it when you see it!! One great thing about have 2 sons who are very alert players but not base stealers is balks seldom, if ever, matter in my house!!
I don't see it that way. If an ump calls a balk, he better have a reason other than "in my judgment" or "I don't know - it just looked funny." Balks are specific violations of specific rules. Any balk is related to a specific rule.
Any solid Ump will never say it looked funny, there is virtually no argument for he "he flinched" have seen many times, it looked funny, everyone know its, balk called...play on.
OK. I understand now and agree. The kind of thing you're talking about can be applied as judgment that the pitcher acted in a way so as to break a particular balk rule. I guess, even in the above scenario, an ump who thought it was a balk, but couldn't come up with a rule to fit could just say "he flinched." As a coach, I wouldn't like it, but I certainly couldn't argue it.
An umpire should be able to explain a balk in about five words and using the key words in the relevant rule. A flinch is a start-and-stop balk.
