I always wait for you to respond and then I agree .

 

Seriously, you cannot balk to 2nd base with a runner on 2nd. When you spin towards 2B you are meeting the requirement. There is no requirement that the throw itself be TO the base.

 

The other play that gets people all jacked up for no reason is when the P spins towards 2B and the runner takes off to 3B. The P then proceeds to throw it to the waiting F5. People scream for a balk but the rule specifically allows it.

 

Not that it would ever really occur, but you could do so if a pitcher in making the throw to second stepped towards first base. Again, not likely to occur, but perhaps his cleats might get stuck or he simply falls off balance. You still have to step towards the base you are going to throw to.

But what is the argument you always hear for the balk to be called?

 

Obviously - "there's no runner on third base!"

 

Nothing like a stand full of umpires who generally know very little about the rules. Quite entertaining at times.

I'm not an expert but I disagree with all who say it is not a balk. I agree that a pitcher can step towards second base and not make a throw. However, if he steps towards second base AND throws the ball, he has to throw it to second base. He cannot, step towards second base and throw the ball to third base. By throwing the ball to the shortstop he is NOT throwing to the base that he stepped towards. All of this has to happen with his foot on the rubber. Obviously if he takes his foot off of the rubber then he in an infielder and able to throw anywhere he wants. This is my understanding of the rule and I've seen it called a couple of times (although apparently the umpire didn't know the rule the same as I do not).

I agree with Stang, I do not believe he can throw it to a position player that

is not covering a base or making a play to cover(even 2nd). I've never seen it on a play like described, but I have seen a balk called where the pitcher threw it to a first baseman who was not deemed to be close enough to first base, to be considered holding the man on. IMH and untrained O, I consider it a balk.

I agree with Stang, I do not believe he can throw it to a position player that

is not covering a base or making a play to cover(even 2nd). I've never seen it on a play like described, but I have seen a balk called where the pitcher threw it to a first baseman who was not deemed to be close enough to first base, to be considered holding the man on. IMH and untrained O, I consider it a balk.

 

I can find nothing in either the FED or MLB rulebook that discusses how close a fielder must be to covering a base during a pickoff attempt. If anyone knows of such a rule, please give the rule cite if you would. Ultimately, I believe it's allowable under the provision that he was "making a play on the runner."

From MLBUM:

 

(b) There is no violation if a pitcher attempts a pick-off at second base and, seeing no fielder covering the bag, throws to the shortstop or second baseman, neither of whom is in the vicinity of the bag nor is making an actual attempt to retire the runner.

Imaking a play to cover(even 2nd). I've never seen it on a play like described, but I have seen a balk called where the pitcher threw it to a first baseman who was not deemed to be close enough to first base, to be considered holding the man on. IMH and untrained O, I consider it a balk.

 

1B is treated differently than the other two bases.

From MLBUM:

 

(b) There is no violation if a pitcher attempts a pick-off at second base and, seeing no fielder covering the bag, throws to the shortstop or second baseman, neither of whom is in the vicinity of the bag nor is making an actual attempt to retire the runner.

 

That would seem rather clear-cut. :notworthy:

1B is treated differently than the other two bases.

 

I believe it would be considered a "feigned" throw, which is obviously not allowed at 1B, but permissible at the other bases.

I believe that is a "feigned attempt" to make it look official by Clyde.

If you can cite paragraph and article number of the MLBUM, I will concede.

Nothing is ever that clear-cut in an umpiring manual.

I believe that is a "feigned attempt" to make it look official by Clyde.

If you can cite paragraph and article number of the MLBUM, I will concede.

Nothing is ever that clear-cut in an umpiring manual.

 

I'm always glad to be called out and doubted. Keeps me on my toes. Let me work on getting the reference.

I'm always glad to be called out and doubted. Keeps me on my toes. Let me work on getting the reference.

 

MLBUM 7.5 (b) There is no violation if a pitcher attempts a pick-off at second base and, seeing no fielder covering the bag, throws to the shortstop or second baseman, neither of whom is in the vicinity of the bag nor is making an actual attempt to retire the runner.

 

This rule is found in the Major League Baseball Umpire Manual, which contains procedures, interpretations, clarifications, general practices, and rulings endorsed by Major League Baseball. It is provided as a supplement to the Official Baseball Playing Rules which govern all games in Major League Baseball.

 

You will not find any such specific rule cited in the OBR because that rule book only cites things that are illegal, not legal. Therefore, it would be up to someone claiming this move to be illegal to cite the OBR rule making it so. Which of course, can't be done in this situation since it is not a balk.

MLBUM 7.5 (b) There is no violation if a pitcher attempts a pick-off at second base and, seeing no fielder covering the bag, throws to the shortstop or second baseman, neither of whom is in the vicinity of the bag nor is making an actual attempt to retire the runner.

 

This rule is found in the Major League Baseball Umpire Manual, which contains procedures, interpretations, clarifications, general practices, and rulings endorsed by Major League Baseball. It is provided as a supplement to the Official Baseball Playing Rules which govern all games in Major League Baseball.

 

You will not find any such specific rule cited in the OBR because that rule book only cites things that are illegal, not legal. Therefore, it would be up to someone claiming this move to be illegal to cite the OBR rule making it so. Which of course, can't be done in this situation since it is not a balk.

 

Thanks, bro.

Well done, I concede.