The second baseman never attempted to throw to first so your first explanation is incorrect. I'd watch the film again. I've said before and will continue to say it's a junk rule. Go back and read some, I've conceded the fact that the ump may have made the correct call according to the rules. My point is that the rule needs to be changed or at least modified.

If in the opinion of the umpire, the second baseman was not even able to make an attempt, he is perfectly correct (the umpire) and within his judgement to declare interference. It was a judgement call that could be debated ad nauseum (it actually already has been), and the rule is not likely to change given how long it has been on the books. And I have read enough to know that as currently written, the call was correct. That's what the umpire is required to do, enforce the rules as written, not what he/she or the fans or coaches may want them to say. The KHSAA is very involved at the NFHS level in rules writing, if you have better wording, you should probably send it to them. But be prepared that you don't open up problems with your proposal. In many cases, I have seen the KHSAA and NFHS change rules to fix one problem, only to compound or create more of them.

Oldtimer, you are incorrect . The release is not the basis. The "time of pitch" is when the catcher can move. Time of pitch is defined as when the pitcher commits himself to throw to the plate. That is well before the actual release of the pitch.

 

Here is the wording as posted by KYFEDUMP:

 

cshs81, you hit the nail on the head. Rule 2.28.3 of the NFHS Rule Book defines the "time of pitch". It is when the pitcher has committed himself to delivering the pitch to the batter. Lot of language in there, but basically it's any movement of the arms or legs after coming set (either windup or set position) that would commit the pitcher to delivering a pitch. Using that definition, I have to rethink my original opinion on whether the catcher actually moved out of the box prior to "time of pitch" on the controversial no call. It might have just "looked" bad but a legal move. (Note: Next time you see an intentional walk in a MLB game, notice when the catcher moves out of the box to the side. It's when the pitcher first starts his motion (which is consistent with the wording of the NFHS rule). In other words, it appears that the rule is the same for OBR.

cshs81, you hit the nail on the head. Rule 2.28.3 of the NFHS Rule Book defines the "time of pitch". It is when the pitcher has committed himself to delivering the pitch to the batter. Lot of language in there, but basically it's any movement of the arms or legs after coming set (either windup or set position) that would commit the pitcher to delivering a pitch. Using that definition, I have to rethink my original opinion on whether the catcher actually moved out of the box prior to "time of pitch" on the controversial no call. It might have just "looked" bad but a legal move. (Note: Next time you see an intentional walk in a MLB game, notice when the catcher moves out of the box to the side. It's when the pitcher first starts his motion (which is consistent with the wording of the NFHS rule). In other words, it appears that the rule is the same for OBR.

Have been thinking about this as well, and I'm not so sure that we had a catchers balk in that situation. I was not there, and did not see it, but I have a feeling that it might be exactly as you described "looking bad". Often, fans of the game see a play that "looks bad" and immediately think it is a rules violation. Or on the flip side, they see a play that they consider "good baseball" (i.e. the interference call at 2nd) and think that its a bad call by the umpire. My advice: Most of the "blues" see thousands upon thousands of plays a year. The ones that make it to Applebee's usually have many years of that experience, some even being former minor league umpires(I know of at least one). They usually know the rules, inside and out, and USUALLY get it right. I'm not saying they are perfect, but even the MLB guys blow a call every now and again. I can completely see how the average fan, or even an experienced baseball guy like Bob Myerhoff, might think that the catcher jumping out "before the pitch" is a balk. However, as we have shown, if the pitcher moved both arms or the non pitching leg(in the windup), the non pitching leg or separated from the glove(in the stretch), THAT is the TOP and the catcher can move out of the box if he so chooses. Just because it "looks bad" doesn't mean its illegal.

Well, just one more thought from me on this one. I don't mind being incorrect from time-to-time, and some good points have been made and I agree with them. I know,here comes the but, but "the time of pitch" does refer to the beginning of the motion towards homeplate; I agree, however, if that ball is not released as part of that motion it becomes a balk. If it is dropped or thrown to the ground it must cross the foul line somewhere between home and first or home and third to become a ball otherwise it is a balk. If you watch as you suggested[ a good suggestion] the cat cher on an intentional walk you will see him stay until the release. I really felt the umpire did his best on this call under the conditions[ though I never saw the play with my eyes] I think all you guys gave a good description from different angles.

Well, just one more thought from me on this one. I don't mind being incorrect from time-to-time, and some good points have been made and I agree with them. I know,here comes the but, but "the time of pitch" does refer to the beginning of the motion towards homeplate; I agree, however, if that ball is not released as part of that motion it becomes a balk. If it is dropped or thrown to the ground it must cross the foul line somewhere between home and first or home and third to become a ball otherwise it is a balk. If you watch as you suggested[ a good suggestion] the cat cher on an intentional walk you will see him stay until the release. I really felt the umpire did his best on this call under the conditions[ though I never saw the play with my eyes] I think all you guys gave a good description from different angles.

 

OT - I agree on the fact that the ball has to be released and cross the plate or else its a balk. However, the catcher can jump out once the pitcher is committed to the pitch.

This is a commonly misconstrued rule, especially at the H.S. level and below. There is no "fielders balk", its a myth, in the form you are describing it. First off, as expressed by Mr. Tackett himself this winter, a fielder can have one foot in fair territory and one foot in foul ground and be legal. Just as you are still considered in the field of play when you make a catch near a dugout and have one foot inside the dugout, and one foot out. If the fielder has two feet outside the lines, then we only have 7 in the field of play. Since no play can start without 8 in between the lines, we have a dead ball until that fielder gets back in fair ground. I suppose the only way you could have a fielders balk is to have a player move over the lines before the TOP, but after he originally sets up(which would be next to impossible). Reference rule 1-1-4, "At the TOP, all fielders shall be on fair ground except the catcher who shall be in the catcher's box. A fielder is in fair ground when at least one foot is touching fair ground. So actually, your both wrong, if I'm reading the posts correctly.

 

 

This was, and probably still is, a misunderstood rule in high school baseball. As a right handed firstbaseman, I always dropped my right foot into foul territory to get my glove closer to the bag. I had just as many umpires tell me I couldn't do that as I did not say a word.

 

As far as breaking up a double play, we were always taught to go in hard, keep the cleats below the knees, make sure we could touch the base, do not pop up unless you wanted your face reconstructed, and make sure we were able to stop with something still being able to touch the base.

As far as breaking up a double play, we were always taught to go in hard, keep the cleats below the knees, make sure we could touch the base, do not pop up unless you wanted your face reconstructed, and make sure we were able to stop with something still being able to touch the base.

 

The FPSR says you go directly to the base in a straight line. So, being able to touch the base would not be enough in high school ball.

The FPSR says you go directly to the base in a straight line. So, being able to touch the base would not be enough in high school ball.

 

True...Rule change needed...

The FPSR says you go directly to the base in a straight line. So, being able to touch the base would not be enough in high school ball.

 

 

Which I'm not arguing with. Just simply stated what we were always taught in high school.