Pitching and Pitchers Discussion Is this a legal motion?

[default]

While the coaches and spectators may complain, It's never Illegal until the the Blue calls it!;&



JMHO and DD pitching coach will have my head for saying it....It's all legal until its called otherwise. Osterman, Abbott and Tincher were illegal by ASA definitions, but they were rarely called for it. They were smart pitchers that got away with what they could in a game.

 

[default]

While the coaches and spectators may complain, It's never Illegal until the the Blue calls it!;&



JMHO and DD pitching coach will have my head for saying it....It's all legal until its called otherwise. Osterman, Abbott and Tincher were illegal by ASA definitions, but they were rarely called for it. They were smart pitchers that got away with what they could in a game.

I totally agree untill they are caught in an important game and have trouble adjusting. Abbott did get caught and did have a tough outing from trying to adjust. Better to do it right from the start.

 

[default]

you posted:

R/S #40: A CROW HOP is defined as a replant of the pivot foot prior to
delivering the pitch. This can be done by (1) sliding the foot in
front, but not in contact with, the pitcher's plate; (2) lifting the pivot
foot and stepping forward; or (3) jumping forward from the pitcher?s
plate with the pivot foot prior to starting the pitch. Umpires should
look at the location of the pivot foot when the hands separate, the
start of the pitch. If the pivot foot is off and in front of the pitcher's
plate before the hands separate, this would be a crow hop and
an illegal pitch should be called.


What you are referring to is the hands separating before the Start of the pitch. That does not mean the same thing as what #1 or #2 says. #1 and #2 may not happen before DELIVERING the pitch.

The Rules Supplement is listing three different methods how the pitcher can replant the pivot foot in front of the pitcher's plate before starting the pitch (ie: before the hands separate). It then lists ONE way for umpires to determine if the infraction has occured.

How can you read that R/S and just arbitrarily assume the one way listed for umpires to determine this infraction doesn't apply to all three of the possible methods? You are "reading something into it" that simply doesn't exist. This is causing you to have a faulty interpretation of the Rules Supplement.

Further, you are still confusing the use of the term "delivering the pitch" to mean the exact same thing as "releasing the pitch".

From the standpoint of the rules, it might help if you break it down like this:

A) Pitching Preliminaries: This is when the pitcher first steps onto the pitcher's plate. Certain preliminaries must be met, like touching the rubber, having the hands separated, pausing to take, or appear to take, a signal from the catcher, then bringing the hands together. All of these conditions must be met before starting the pitch.

B) Start of the Pitch: The pitch officially starts when the hands are separated following the required touching together. The pitcher's pushoff point, or strating point, is whatever position the pivot is in at this instant.

The start of the pitch cannot happen until all of the requirements of (A) have been met.

C) The Delivery: The delivery is the sum total pitching motion that the pitcher uses to throw the pitch after separating the hands.

The delivery begins when the pitch is started/hands separate. It ends with the release of the ball and the pitcher's follow through.

The delivery cannot happen until all of the requirements of (A) and (B) have been met.

The Rules Supplement is listing three possible ways that a pitcher can commit a violation with the pivot foot BEFORE ever getting to step (B) of the above sequence. The guideline given to umpires to detect these violations applies equally to ALL THREE methods a pitcher might use.

I won't even bother with the California Interscholastic Federation's version of this same rule, because no game in Ohio will ever be played under CIF rules or interpretations! All they have done is take the standard ASA interpretation and rewritten it. It means the same thing, it's just worded a little differently.

Punchout, it's obvious that you don't agree with what I've been saying and I won't begrudge your right to disagree. Sorry if we're beating a dead horse or boring any OFC readers with this long drawn out exchange. At least it's been a civil exchange.

I've tried to base my position on the published rules and interpretations that might actually apply in the state of Ohio- in this case, ASA and NFHS regulations.

 

[default]

If an infraction is so brief, lasting mere fractions of a second, and so tiny, with the foot maybe one inch or less off the ground, if that, and so difficult to detect that it takes multiple slow-motion replays and captured screen shoots to pick up, an umpire shouldn't be calling it. Umpires are told not to call a violation unless they are 100% CERTAIN they have seen it. To me, there isn't enough in that video to convince me 100% that the both feet are airbourne at the same time.​

]

"Every time I get out, they pull me back in!!!" - Al Pachino

EVERY infraction of a leap is going to be in fractions of a second, the ENTIRE PITCHING MOTION is less than a second. That argument is just ridiculous. Last I checked, there was also no height requirement on a leap. Where do you start calling it? 2 inches? 6 inches? 6 Feet? That is like saying someone is "kinda" pregnant. The rules are in place for a reason, and they should be enforced as they are written. If you think that there should be exceptions to the rule for time in the air, distance, or height of the leap, I'm sure there are channels in which you can submit your ideas for inclusion into the rules. Have you ever called anyone on a leap? If you have I would LOVE to see a video of her pitching. She must be half mountain goat.

I will grant you that the video was not the greatest, but the tell tail bounce of the back foot should be enough for a seasoned ump to know at a bare minimum that something is running foul in her drag. Maybe take a lower angle to see if there is air under that back foot. Again, if you are uncertain about whether the pitcher is leaping there should be a line in the dirt from the very front of the mound under the pivot/push foot extending UNBROKEN to the general vicinity of the plant foot. The girl we have been going round and round about leaves marks in the dirt that look like two dots and a dash, that is Morse Code for illegal pitch!!;&

 

[default]

Bretman, not to sound like Clinton but do you not see the word OR between #2 and #3?
That sperates the ideas. That means it doesnt matter where the hands part on #1 and #2.
Look My kid started pitching in `95. Stopped in 2006. She was a standout in both summer and high school, all state in high school 3 times. THEN she pitched for Ohio St. I "think" I know what I am talking about, and what is legal and what is not.
I can tell you this, you can use any dang label you want. If a kid leaps into the air, it is illegal. If a kid EVER replants it is illegal. It matters not if she drags and then replants or if she leaped and replants. they are all illegal.
I am done with this, you obviously have no clue as to what is legal or what is not. You are too hung up on the label an illegal move gets. I have tried to show you that the rule is broken into different parts (the word OR does that.)


R/S #40: A CROW HOP is defined as a replant of the pivot foot prior to
delivering the pitch. This can be done by (1) sliding the foot in
front, but not in contact with, the pitcher's plate; (2) lifting the pivot
foot and stepping forward;......... OR.............. (3) jumping forward from the pitcher?s
plate with the pivot foot prior to starting the pitch. Umpires should
look at the location of the pivot foot when the hands separate, the
start of the pitch. If the pivot foot is off and in front of the pitcher's
plate before the hands separate, this would be a crow hop and
an illegal pitch should be called.

You are the one confused by delivering the pitch and starting the pitch. ..Delivering the pitch is everything after the separating of the hands until the actual letting go of the ball...starting the pitch is the separating the hands.

#1 means a kid who drags and then replants then releases......#2 means a kid who takes a little hop , replants and then releases...#3 means a kid who steps forward before the hands separate or before the pitch actually starts.
Those are the 3 ways to crow hop.

By the way you answered it your self.
It says 2 infractions before delivering the pitch, and one before starting the pitch. Completely different actions.

 

[default]

Question for Bretman (loaded)

In your opinion, is the girl in question replanting her pivot foot at any time during the delivery of the pitch?

If the answer is YES, then it is an illegal pitch as defined by the rules already quoted.

If the answer is NO, I have to ask again if we are looking at the same video.

 

[default]

On page 4 of the already discounted California rules supplement, it defines a Crow Hop like this.

Crow Hop = A replant of the pivot foot prior to releasing the ball

Ohio says A crow hop is the replant of the pivot foot prior to delivering the pitch.

You state
C) The Delivery: The delivery is the sum total pitching motion that the pitcher uses to throw the pitch after separating the hands.

The delivery begins when the pitch is started/hands separate. It ends with the release of the ball and the pitcher's follow through.

Are you saying that a pitcher can legally replant any time they want after the hands separate because the replant did not occur before the "delivery of the pitch" as you define it? To me, ANY replant prior to release (completion of delivery) is illegal.

BTW, I couldn't find that delivery definition, where did you get that?

 

[default]

I think this is kinda like the war in Iraq. Bretman has gotten himself into it and can't figure out how to get out of it and still declair victory. So we'll just keep it going till we all forget what it was about in the first place. So what was this thread about again? Does a riseball really rise?

 

[default]

Bretman, not to sound like Clinton but do you not see the word OR between #2 and #3? That sperates the ideas. That means it doesnt matter where the hands part on #1 and #2.

Your assumption and conclusion is totally wrong. All the word "or" means in that sentence is that any of three actions must take place before the hands separate.

This has been reinforced at every ASA National Umpire School I have attended.

It has been reinforced in every rule clinic I have attended.

It is reinforced in the NFHS video posted earlier, where all three actions are demonstrated and the same guideline to watch for when the hands separate is given to umpires for all three.

It is reinforced in the NFHS Point of Emphasis published in their rule book and on their website.

Look My kid started pitching in `95. Stopped in 2006. She was a standout in both summer and high school, all state in high school 3 times. THEN she pitched for Ohio St. I "think" I know what I am talking about, and what is legal and what is not.

Then you should be proud of your daughter and all of her accomplishments.

But look, my kid served in the U.S. Armed Forces. That doesn't make me an expert in strategic warfare or the military code.

You are the one confused by delivering the pitch and starting the pitch. ..Delivering the pitch is everything after the separating of the hands until the actual letting go of the ball...starting the pitch is the separating the hands.

Here is what I posted:

"The delivery begins when the pitch is started/hands separate. It ends with the release of the ball and the pitcher's follow through."

This is EXACTLY the same thing you're saying, so where am I confused?

 

[default]

EVERY infraction of a leap is going to be in fractions of a second, the ENTIRE PITCHING MOTION is less than a second. That argument is just ridiculous. Last I checked, there was also no height requirement on a leap. Where do you start calling it?

You start calling it when it is obvious and detectable by the human eye. You don't guess at the call.

If an umpire suspects that "something is running afoul on the drag" he better be 100% certain of what that something is and be able to articulate it to a coach before calling it.

Umpire: "Illegal Pitch!"
Coach: "Blue, why did you call that?"
Umpire: "Something looked fishy to me. I'm not exactly sure what, but there's something afoul with the pivot foot."

That's not going to fly...

As stated earlier, the quality of the video leaves something to be desired. I'm not 100% certain if the foot is barely touching the ground or barely off of it. Maybe you are, but that would be your opinion and you are welcome to it.

Sure, a pitcher's drag can be "read" by marks in the dirt. But I don't think that the video quality is high enough to accurately read those marks. And it's not sufficient enough to tell if the ground in front of the pitcher's plate is flat or divoted. By rule, if there is any sort of depression or divot where the foot is dragging, the pitcher's foot may lose contact with the ground so long as it remains parallel with the surface.

 

[default]

Question for Bretman (loaded)

In your opinion, is the girl in question replanting her pivot foot at any time during the delivery of the pitch?

Not as defined and interpreted by rule.

BTW, I couldn't find that delivery definition, where did you get that?

Look at the ASA pitching rules. They are broken up into three sections (just like my example).

Section #1 is "Preliminaries".

Section #2 is "Starting the Pitch".

Section #3 is "Legal Delivery". The delivery is composed of all the requirements described in this section. The delivery is what happens after everything in sections #1 and #2 have taken place.

 

[default]

Not as defined and interpreted by rule. QUOTE]

What a lawyerly reply. Ask a yes or no question and get a wishy washy answer. I'd bet if we could read deep into your mind, you know darn well she is replanting, but won't admit it because it doesn't fit the rule interpretation. (in your opinion at least)

The biggest problem must be the interpretations muddy the water. They emphasize to look before the hands are separated, which you and apparently many umpires read to mean stop looking at any point beyond that. What the plain english of the rule and the definition to me says is ANY replant not on the pitching plate is illegal. Not just at the point they emphasize to look, but also after that point in the delivery. Forget the hands, watch the feet.

Thus we have epidemic illegal pitching and umpires that won't call it. When I copied those pictures several pages back, I had to look at 3 videos to find a kid who was dragging legally. So many of them were leaping, it amazed me they had them posted. Apparently they think it's just fine and dandy because they rarely if ever get called on it. On the other hand, when you see one dragging legally, it's just as obvious.

Leaping, crow hopping, stepping out of the 24' width are all illegal because they give an advantage to the pitcher who does it. PERIOD. It should be called and it doesn't take a guess to see it in most cases. I'm all for giving the benfit of the doubt, but in this case I have zero doubt from the video alone.

Umpire Illegal pitch!!
Coach Why did you call that?
Umpire Pitcher is leaping/crow hopping/replanting/stepping out.
Coach Never been called before!
Umpire Regardless, she did it.
End of discussion.

Last season on my younger kid's team, we had a pitcher who leaped. Coaches knew it, kid knew it, dad knew it, and she was trying to break the habit. It was blatent when she did it, usually when she got a little tired. Got called twice all year. Nobody complained when it was called, everyone knew she was illegal. Opposing coaches were in the umps ears almost every game about it. Why was it called less than 10% of the time?

Seems like every year it's a point of emphasis. Why is that? Because it's not being called correctly.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. To me the pitcher in the video is unquestionably illegal. Not so for you. If we could get umpires to be 50-50 on calling illegal pitches, then we'd solve the problem. Seems like it's more like 95-5.

It's OK Bretman, I'll still love you in the morning!

 

[default]

That should be an easy call especially if there are two umps in a game. I do not understand why so many umpires have trouble with illegal pitches. It isnt that difficult to see.

 

[default]

Well, it could be that it is left up to the base umpire who is watching leaving early and pitching at the same time.

When someone is not on base.. then it's a different story. If a runner is on second... that crow hop is hard to call because of the angle on where you are actually positioned.
Being that MOST tournaments.. the pitching area is not filled in prior to the next game... it then makes it even harder to judge... whether she is hopping or dragging along a plane that is hindered by a big hole in front of the pitcher's plate from the last two games...

It's a tough job... and people try their best. But, the talent pool is getting less and less each year. Sure the economy will bring out more that want to be umpires... but standing on a field calling safe and outs is a whole different story than doing and watching what you should be doing.

Teams will start seeing what I am saying in the next couple of years .

I'm hard on my umpire staff. They will tell you that if asked. I expect them to do their job to the fullest as they are being paid to do a job. And my guys and gals work hard and I tend to get good umpires and good umpires want to work with other good umpires so teams and coaches and parents aren't coming from another field with an attitude about the umpires they just had the game before

 

[default]

I was trying to post some pics, but it is not working

 

[default]

As stated earlier, the quality of the video leaves something to be desired. I'm not 100% certain if the foot is barely touching the ground or barely off of it. Maybe you are, but that would be your opinion and you are welcome to it.

I will give you the "I'm not 100% certain if the foot is barely touching the ground or barely off of it." However, whether or not she is or isn't dragging her foot, you can or at least I can plainly see her replanting and taking a second push to home plate before she delivers the pitch.

 

[default]

That should be an easy call especially if there are two umps in a game. I do not understand why so many umpires have trouble with illegal pitches. It isnt that difficult to see.

I personally don't think that its that umpires have trouble calling illegal pitches. I think that (not all) but alot of umpires take a look at the age of a girl and can assume she's been pitching a while now and if no one has called it by now why should I.

 

[default]

Sorry to regurgitate this thread.... BUT I'm at the Rebel Games in Kissimmee, and a DI college pitcher from a "far west" team was called for at least 2 illegal pitches yesterday evening. It was the EXACT motion discussed in this thread. The leap that produces two holes (because of not dragging during the stride), and a little "swipe" of the trailing foot at the end (at release). The 1st base umpire was demonstrating.

AT LAST! Refreshing that someone actually called it!! I would have shot video, but it's already been shown many times in this thread. The only question... are Ohio pitching coaches migrating west??

 

[default]

This thread has more lives than a cat! Get some video of that pitcher Sammy! Stop her in the parking lot and have her demonstrate her leap for you on camera!

 

[default]

Not Legal outside, but perfectly legal in a skills video.;& I would make a bet that outside on the rubber she doesn't do this. Nearly every pitcher I have had that throws indoors, especially off the floor with no pitching rubber, does this. Not sure why, but I've seen it a bunch. Get them back outside on a real pitching rubber and their fine.
I've made it a point though to have my pitchers throw off of some kind of mat or pitching rubber to elleviate this problem. It could manifest into a problem if she keeps it up.
She looks like a great little pitcher but this skills video with this terrible "crow hop" needs to go in the Recycle Bin!!

It seem like they spent so much money on the production of this video (with the multiple camera angles) that they forgot to invest in a descent pitching mat.

I just happen to know of place where she can get a quality pitching mat for very little money: http://www.game-ex.com/vb3/showthread.php?t=24151