Squeeze play?

If the pitcher has legally stepped off he is now a fielder and can throw to the plate to get the runner. If the batter bunts it then you have some kind of interference on the batter. Not sure of the penalty but it would either be batter is out and runner returns to third OR runner is out and batter stays at the plate.

But let's let the pros chime in and tell us how far off I am.

If the pitcher simulated a pitch (which is possible, given the OP,) then we have a balk and R3 awarded home (and all other runners awarded one base.)

If the pitcher legally disengaged, did not simulate a pitch, and threw home, then we have batter's interference. With fewer than 2 out, R3 is out and all others return to base at TOP; with 2 out, the batter is out. In either case, the run does not score.

Matt when you are saying it's a balk due to the pitcher simulating a pitch I'm picturing a a guy going from the windup and he disengages from the pitchers plate with his pivot foot but the rest of his body makes it look like he's going through his pitching motion. Is that one example of simulating the pitch? What are some other examples of simulating a pitch that would draw a balk?

From the set position I can't see how he could simulate a pitch. Maybe if it's a terrible mound / field and can't see the pitchers plate very well but if you can see that then should be able to see him legally (or illegally) disengage.

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709:
Matt when you are saying it's a balk due to the pitcher simulating a pitch I'm picturing a a guy going from the windup and he disengages from the pitchers plate with his pivot foot but the rest of his body makes it look like he's going through his pitching motion. Is that one example of simulating the pitch? What are some other examples of simulating a pitch that would draw a balk?

That would be the most common way, IME.

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709:From the set position I can't see how he could simulate a pitch. Maybe if it's a terrible mound / field and can't see the pitchers plate very well but if you can see that then should be able to see him legally (or illegally) disengage.

Yes, you should, but a legal disengagement does not preclude a simulated pitch. It is possible for the disengagement to occur unbeknownst to the batter, particularly if the batter is focusing on the pitcher's hands, and the throwing motion to look like a pitching motion. To be honest, I'm hypothesizing now, since I've never seen this balk in a real game from the set position.

Your example is the most common, because with the exception of R1 and R3, most pitchers work from the windup anytime there's a runner on third.

Isn't it automatically a balk if the pitcher disengaged his pivot foot in the middle of his windup? So it wouldn't matter if he simulated a pitch or not, would it?

quote:

Originally posted by Rob Kremer:
Isn't it automatically a balk if the pitcher disengaged his pivot foot in the middle of his windup? So it wouldn't matter if he simulated a pitch or not, would it?

Correct.

Coach, as I understood it, was referring to the windup position, not a pitcher already starting the windup to pitch.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt13:
If the pitcher simulated a pitch (which is possible, given the OP,) then we have a balk and R3 awarded home (and all other runners awarded one base.)

He stepped off legally and threw home in an attempt to retire an advancing runner. Even if he used the exact same motion as he does to pitch, this is not a simulated pitch.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
He stepped off legally and threw home in an attempt to retire an advancing runner. I don't care if he used the exact same motion as he does to pitch. This is not a simulated pitch.

You have no way of stating that, as we do not have video of the play. If he simulates a pitch, it is a balk, per 8.05g.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt13:

You have no way of stating that, as we do not have video of the play. If he simulates a pitch, it is a balk, per 8.05g.

That would be the toughest sell in the history of umpiring.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
That would be the toughest sell in the history of umpiring.

No, it wouldn't. How do you figure? Most motions from the set position are different than ones done to throw, and ALL motions from the windup are going to be different than a throw. This is an easy one if it occurs.

You are completely misinterpreting this rule. It is there to prevent the pitcher from deceiving the batter or a runner by simulating a pitch. In this case, the pitcher is doing no such thing. He's trying to throw a runner out at the plate - legally. To intimate (as you have) that he must use a different arm motion to throw the ball is ludicrous.

Windup or set is irrelevant. He's in neither position because he has legally disengaged. And he's not going to wind up to throw the ball home. That would be silly don't you think? (Although I just might balk that one.)

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
You are completely misinterpreting this rule. It is there to prevent the pitcher from deceiving the batter or a runner by simulating a pitch. In this case, the pitcher is doing no such thing. He's trying to throw a runner out at the plate - legally.

I am doing no such thing. Let's look at it this way--if the batter is fooled into thinking it is a pitch, should he be penalized for executing his play, when the pitcher violated the rule?

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
To intimate (as you have) that he must use a different arm motion to throw the ball is ludicrous.

A pitching motion is more than arm motion.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
Windup or set is irrelevant. He's in neither position because he has legally disengaged.

No, they aren't irrelevant, because they are the crux of what makes this a balk--the simulation of a pitch.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
And he's not going to wind up to throw the ball home. That would be silly don't you think? (Although I just might balk that one.)

That's the point I'm making. If a pitcher simulates a pitch from (in particular) the windup while off the rubber, why shouldn't it be a balk?

F1 set, R3 breaks for home. F1 steps off and throws home with the same motion he normally uses for a pitch from the set position. Batter hits the ball. Balk?

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
F1 set, R3 breaks for home. F1 steps off and throws home with the same motion he normally uses for a pitch from the set position. Batter hits the ball. Balk?

Yep.

While technically correct, especially a wind-up, the likelihood that a pitcher would step off but still use a pitching motion is so unlikely to not be a problem. If you see him step off, give him every benifit if the doubt.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt13:

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
F1 set, R3 breaks for home. F1 steps off and throws home with the same motion he normally uses for a pitch from the set position. Batter hits the ball. Balk?

Yep.

YGBSM

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:

quote:

Originally posted by Matt13:

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
F1 set, R3 breaks for home. F1 steps off and throws home with the same motion he normally uses for a pitch from the set position. Batter hits the ball. Balk?

Yep.

YGBSM

Let's see here...the pitcher violated the rule. The batter was doing what he was supposed to be doing. If you follow CSFP, this is a balk. If you follow literality, this is a balk.

The pitcher did not violate any rule. He stepped off legally and threw home legally. He was not simulating a pitch, he was attempting to retire a runner with a throw. The batter violated the rules by hitting the ball, interfering with the catcher's play at the plate.

What is CSFP?

Common Sense, Fair Play......(CSFP)...

The difference in the positions is what did the pitcher do after stepping off? Did he throw or did he pitch. If he really simulated pitching from the set or wind-up, I've got a balk. I'd have to add, that in nearly 30 years, I've never seen that.

If he stepped off and threw the ball home, and, if the batter struck at, hit or otherwise hindered the throw, I've got interference.

The only time I've ever called a balk on a play like this is when the pitcher did not legally disengage, e.g. stepped forward off the rubber or towards the runner.

Not having the luxury of seeing what actually happend in the OP, I have no opinion on this play at this time.

We return you now to the argument already in progress.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy03:

We return you now to the argument already in progress.

Nah, I'm done with both of them (arguments). I just got back from a vacation in Maine. It's too serene up there. I needed to be chirped at and to chirp back. Thanks.

I've never seen a simulated pitch balk either. I hope I never do.