Calm down, Humpy....we're talking about AMATEUR baseball (and on this forum, HS baseball specifically). 98% of HS pitchers do not have the skill to put the high and tight pitch in the right place to protect against the squeeze so why take a chance on severely injuring someone. And as far as plunking someone, a pitch behind them sends the same message (don't tread on me) without fear of injury. You can't run over the catcher like they do in the pros either without being ejected or suspended.The pros is a wholly different animal with a different set of customs and if you can't see that..well.... You need to chill son...you've got some anger management issues...:irked:

 

Absolutely! I guess you've not seen any of his previous posts, KyFed. A "bit" over-the-top, to say the least. :irked: But his large font type is impressive, is it not?? :laugh:

Calm down, Humpy....we're talking about AMATEUR baseball (and on this forum, HS baseball specifically). 98% of HS pitchers do not have the skill to put the high and tight pitch in the right place to protect against the squeeze so why take a chance on severely injuring someone. And as far as plunking someone, a pitch behind them sends the same message (don't tread on me) without fear of injury. You can't run over the catcher like they do in the pros either without being ejected or suspended.The pros is a wholly different animal with a different set of customs and if you can't see that..well.... You need to chill son...you've got some anger management issues...:irked:

 

Noone is angry here or calling people names. Cant we all get along.

Generally I deal with NCAA and Fed but I checked the online OBR and besides the IBB reference (with a balk as the penalty), the only thing I could find was in the 2.00 Definitions (Catcher's Box) stating the catcher had to be in the box at the time of the pitch. No penalty was specified. It may not be mandatory. I don't know if you remember the time about 10 years ago that the catcher's balk was called on Javy Lopez (Braves) when he was sitting up outside and one foot was outside the catcher's box. The rule might have been changed since that time. There is probably an interpretation in Jaksa-Roder but I don't have a copy... To sum up, I don't know for sure.

 

Well now you've given me something to do tonight in my spare time. :thumb: :lol: If you find out anything more definitive, can you PM me? Like I said, I enjoy this rules stuff. BTW, I'm sure you already know this, but you know there's no such thing as a "catcher's balk", right? It's still just a balk on the pitcher for pitching when the catcher was not in his box.

 

How does one go about obtaining a FED rulebook?

Catcher can't leave the box, during an intentional walk. He can leave early, once the Pitcher delivers the ball. The catcher can't move into the batters box or in front of home plate without the ball, as this is obstruction unless the batter has given up his right to swing.

 

My comment earlier, regarding the catcher leaving too soon, was in reference to the pitchout being tipped and the Coach having time, to attempt to return the runner.

Catcher can't leave the box, during an intentional walk. He can leave early, once the Pitcher delivers the ball. The catcher can't move into the batters box or in front of home plate without the ball, as this is obstruction unless the batter has given up his right to swing.

 

My comment earlier, regarding the catcher leaving too soon, was in reference to the pitchout being tipped and the Coach having time, to attempt to return the runner.

 

I believe he can exit the box as soon as the pitcher starts his delivery, as opposed to having to wait until the ball is released from his hand.

I believe he can exit the box as soon as the pitcher starts his delivery, as opposed to having to wait until the ball is released from his hand.

Could be, but I was always under the impression in NFHS, that the pitcher had to release the ball and not obstruct, the batters right to swing.

Well now you've given me something to do tonight in my spare time. :thumb: :lol: If you find out anything more definitive, can you PM me? Like I said, I enjoy this rules stuff. BTW, I'm sure you already know this, but you know there's no such thing as a "catcher's balk", right? It's still just a balk on the pitcher for pitching when the catcher was not in his box.

 

How does one go about obtaining a FED rulebook?

 

Coop,

You got me on that one...I was using the vernacular...a balk on the pitcher caused by the catcher not being in the box while the pitcher is pitching would be more PC...I can hear the pitcher now, Blue...I couldn't see whether his foot was in the box or not. .Also, if I can get a line on a Jaksa-Roder, I'll look the interpretation up and PM you. I'm sure it's in there, everything else is.. And,for NFHS rulebooks, go to http://www.nfhs.org and follow the links. They're $6.95 each. Casebooks (interpretations) are also there for the same price.

Could be, but I was always under the impression in NFHS, that the pitcher had to release the ball and not obstruct, the batters right to swing.

 

Well, to be clear, I was referring to IBB only. Catcher can only leave box on IBB after pitcher has started his delivery. To do so too early would cause the pitcher to make an illegal pitch - hence the (inaccurate) term "catcher's balk."

I believe he can exit the box as soon as the pitcher starts his delivery, as opposed to having to wait until the ball is released from his hand.

 

 

Coop,

You are absolutely correct, time of pitch (when catcher can move out of box) is defined as the no return point in the pitching sequence. Basically, in NFHS, the initial movement of arms and/or legs that commit the pitcher to pitch..

Coop,

You got me on that one...I was using the vernacular...a balk on the pitcher caused by the catcher not being in the box while the pitcher is pitching would be more PC...I can hear the pitcher now, Blue...I couldn't see whether his foot was in the box or not. .Also, if I can get a line on a Jaksa-Roder, I'll look the interpretation up and PM you. I'm sure it's in there, everything else is.. And,for NFHS rulebooks, go to http://www.nfhs.org and follow the links. They're $6.95 each. Casebooks (interpretations) are also there for the same price.

 

Yes! Love to get one over on an ump. :lol: I only know it because I had to do a ton of research on a "fielder's balk" that was called on my team repeatedly by some umpire crew in a tournament a few years ago (there is no such thing!) and came across the "catcher's balk" term.

 

BTW, thanks for the NFHS info. Ordering it soon as this post is done. Which is now.

Catcher can't leave the box, during an intentional walk. He can leave early, once the Pitcher delivers the ball. The catcher can't move into the batters box or in front of home plate without the ball, as this is obstruction unless the batter has given up his right to swing.

 

My comment earlier, regarding the catcher leaving too soon, was in reference to the pitchout being tipped and the Coach having time, to attempt to return the runner.

 

Guys,

I think we're getting OBR and Fed mixed up here....all you have to do in Fed is send them to first base...you don't pitch an IBB. You can have an unintentional intentional walk but the catcher doesn't stand up and move out for that one...

Guys,

I think we're getting OBR and Fed mixed up here....all you have to do in Fed is send them to first base...you don't pitch an IBB. You can have an unintentional intentional walk but the catcher doesn't stand up and move out for that one...

I completely understand the difference and always refer to NFHS guidelines. If you choose to have a pitchout, the catcher is in the box.

 

The IBB, is in reference to a previous question, on the catcher leaving early and not an issue, with the different governing Rules.

I have no problem with it. The pitcher is penalized with the batter getting 1st base.

 

It's part of the game. I will never condone a pitcher throwing at someone's head (or upper body), but I have no problem with a pitcher putting one right between the numbers or in the butt. Although I'd hate to see it on any level younger than varsity, it is a part of the game and all baseball players should understand it. As long as it is done the "right way", everything is okay.

I have no problem with it. The pitcher is penalized with the batter getting 1st base.

 

It's part of the game. I will never condone a pitcher throwing at someone's head (or upper body), but I have no problem with a pitcher putting one right between the numbers or in the butt. Although I'd hate to see it on any level younger than varsity, it is a part of the game and all baseball players should understand it. As long as it is done the "right way", everything is okay.

 

Would not "between the numbers" count as "upper body"? :lol:

I have no problem with it. The pitcher is penalized with the batter getting 1st base.

 

It's part of the game. I will never condone a pitcher throwing at someone's head (or upper body), but I have no problem with a pitcher putting one right between the numbers or in the butt. Although I'd hate to see it on any level younger than varsity, it is a part of the game and all baseball players should understand it. As long as it is done the "right way", everything is okay.

 

 

OK...I understand that some will think it's OK and some (like me) won't as it relates to amateur (HS) baseball. But, to extrapolate my argument further, if NCAA does it, then varsity HS thinks they need to in order to emulate the players on the next step up. Same goes for JV, then middle school, etc. You can't just say it's OK for the higher level (varsity HS) and not for younger players. I still believe that it is something unique to the pro game (and all of its levels). In the pros,the level of skill in "plunking" is also more likely to result in the desired message and not a catestrophic injury. If the plunking occurs, HS kids have been known to charge the mound and fight (just like the pros). Or curse when they're hit, which is an ejection offense in HS ball. I think the amateur/pro baseball distinction should be acknowleged, but I realize that a lot of the posters on here don't see it that way..