Attempted Steal of Home, Catcher's Interference.

[mrumpiresir]

The bases are loaded in this video but if there was no runner on first and the runner on second does not advance, is he awarded third on the balk?  In other words, can both the CI and the balk be enforced on the play?

[Replacematt]

13 minutes ago, MooseLoop said:

Can someone please cite the OBR rule or interpretation that says catcher's interference on a steal of home is a balk?  I neither see a balk here nor see an umpire calling a balk.  The ball did not slip out of the pitcher's hand, he was not giving an intentional walk.  Seems like straightforward CI, batter gets first, and all other runners advance as forced.  Then the coach has an option to take the play instead of the penalty.  Since the runner was out, the coach would take the penalty that forces his R3 to score.

5.05(b)(3) and 6.01(g).

[Tborze]

7 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

6.01(g) (7.07) Interference With Squeeze Play or Steal
of Home
If, with a runner on third base and trying to score by means of a
squeeze play or a steal, the catcher or any other fielder steps on, or
in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the
batter or his bat, the pitcher shall be charged with a balk, the batter
shall be awarded first base on the interference and the ball is dead.

Thanks Rich!  

So in OBR we would have one run in and runners on the corners in this case. 

PS: MooseLoop asked for the rule, tx for posting it. 

[KenBAZ]

We all agree that F2 is guilty​ of obstruction. Are you saying he also balked? Does anyone have a casebook play. I'm getting more confused. In the past, under all codes I would have enforced the CO unless the F1 balked in delivering the pitch. In that case I would have enforced the back in Fed and ignored it in OBR if all runners advanced including the BR. In this post who and what was the balk?

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[Replacematt]

Just now, KenBAZ said:

We all agree that F2 is guilty of obstruction. Are you saying he also balked? Does anyone have a casebook play. I'm getting more confused. In the past, under all codes I would have enforced the CO unless the F1 balked in delivering the pitch. In that case I would have enforced the back in Fed and ignored it in OBR if all runners advanced including the BR. In this post who and what was the balk?

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 

I think you're overthinking things. All of your answers are in this thread. Take a break and reread with fresh eyes.

[Rich Ives]

2 hours ago, KenBAZ said:

What is simply charged a balk? F2 leaving his box?

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 

Because the rule says it's a balk.

[Jimurray]

2 hours ago, KenBAZ said:

We all agree that F2 is guilty of obstruction. Are you saying he also balked? Does anyone have a casebook play. I'm getting more confused. In the past, under all codes I would have enforced the CO unless the F1 balked in delivering the pitch. In that case I would have enforced the back in Fed and ignored it in OBR if all runners advanced including the BR. In this post who and what was the balk?

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 

We don't all agree it is obstruction. In OBR and NCAA it is catcher's interference and the rule is different than FED. The OBR and NCAA balk is a rule method to advance all runners. What would you do with the runners in the codes other than FED in the past?

[Kevin_K]

In FED

1.1.4 indicates all players except the catcher must be in fair territory at the time of the pitch. If not, the penalty is an illegal pitch.

If F2 is in fair territory - because he stepped in front of home plate - is this a violation of this rule? If so, do we enforce the penalty of an illegal pitch with runners on base, namely a balk (2.18.1)?

[KenBAZ]

Previous to Rich's post no one would confirm that they were calling a balk on the catcher for leaving his box too soon. If you make that call then in OBR I would enforce the CI and ignore the balk. In Fed, I'd kill the play after the balk and only enforce the balk. I seems like that may be wrong but I'd like some support for why. Thanks for helping me understand this.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[Richvee]

21 minutes ago, Kevin_K said:

In FED

1.1.4 indicates all players except the catcher must be in fair territory at the time of the pitch. If not, the penalty is an illegal pitch.

If F2 is in fair territory - because he stepped in front of home plate - is this a violation of this rule? If so, do we enforce the penalty of an illegal pitch with runners on base, namely a balk (2.18.1)?

I would say no. TOP is when F1 starts his motion. At that point, F2 is in foul territory. He moves up as the pitcher is in his motion.

[basejester]

17 minutes ago, KenBAZ said:

Previous to Rich's post no one would confirm that they were calling a balk on the catcher for leaving his box too soon. If you make that call then in OBR I would enforce the CI and ignore the balk. In Fed, I'd kill the play after the balk and only enforce the balk. I seems like that may be wrong but I'd like some support for why. Thanks for helping me understand this.

Sent from my SM-G935T using 

The penalty isn't for the catcher leaving his box; it's this stuff:

If, with a runner on third base and trying to score by means of a
squeeze play or a steal, the catcher or any other fielder steps on, or
in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the
batter or his bat, the pitcher shall be charged with a balk, the batter
shall be awarded first base on the interference and the ball is dead.

[ricka56]

10 hours ago, ElkOil said:

Since the catcher wasn't in his box during the pitch, I'd balk it for that. In Fed, the ball is dead immediately, so nothing else that happened after that counts... unless you call MC on the runner.

Are you disputing the validity of Fed CB 8.3.1b ruling (which, IMO is analogous to the play in the video) ? Or are you disputing that its analogous ? If so, please say what significantly distinguishes them.

[ElkOil]

1 hour ago, ricka56 said:

Are you disputing the validity of Fed CB 8.3.1b ruling (which, IMO is analogous to the play in the video) ? Or are you disputing that its analogous ? If so, please say what significantly distinguishes them.

I'm not disputing any of it -- it makes sense to me now after reading the case play and understanding that it's not a balk if the F2 is out of his box after TOP.

[BrianC14]

The video graphic shows that the bases are loaded at the TOP.   If CI is being enforced, then the batter being awarded 1B means that all runners are going to be forced to move up.

[ALStripes17]

The video graphic shows that the bases are loaded at the TOP.   If CI is being enforced, then the batter being awarded 1B means that all runners are going to be forced to move up.

Yes. But the conversation is still warranted in order to understand what to do if the bases were not loaded... (Say R2 and R3 only). And it could be diff outcomes if under NCAA/OBR or FED rules

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[CJK]

Talking about "what if" is what makes people with good judgment into good umpires.

[BrianC14]

6 hours ago, ALStripes17 said:

Yes. But the conversation is still warranted in order to understand what to do if the bases were not loaded... (Say R2 and R3 only). And it could be diff outcomes if under NCAA/OBR or FED rules

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 

There just seemed to be more convo centered on what "wasn't" compared to "what was".  

At the end of the vid, announcers tell us that "Morales is back on 3rd base".... and the batter.... where did they put him?   The play started with a 1-0 count, he swung at the pitch... but the video concludes with a different batter.

Before going too deep into 'what if' (which is great for discussion) I'd like to know how this was all resolved.

[ricka56]

On 4/21/2017 at 0:09 AM, ElkOil said:

I'm not disputing any of it -- it makes sense to me now after reading the case play and understanding that it's not a balk if the F2 is out of his box after TOP.

I think that the reasoning for not calling both balk and CI is a chicken/egg thing created by Fed's immediate deadball balk rule. If you balk it, then it can't be CI because it is a deadball. 

[MT73]

So what happens on this play in Fed?

[noumpere]

5 minutes ago, MT73 said:

So what happens on this play in Fed?

CI.. Runners advance if stealing (or, obviously, if forced by BR being awarded first)

[MT73]

Thanks.

[Tborze]

20 minutes ago, MidAmUmp said:

To put this thing to bed...

At the NCAA level, it's a balk & catcher's interference. R3 scores, all other runners advance on the balk & the batter is awarded 1st base on the catcher's interference.

So basically they are penalizing for both so all runners move up?  The (catchers) Balk, and the INT. 

In FED, runners only move up on the CO (not CI in FED) if stealing on the pitch. 

[ALStripes17]

So basically they are penalizing for both so all runners move up?  The (catchers) Balk, and the INT. 
In FED, runners only move up on the CO (not CI in FED) if stealing on the pitch. 

Correct

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[ricka56]

22 hours ago, Tborze said:

In FED, runners only move up on the CO (not CI in FED) if stealing on the pitch. 

Batter also gets 1B and any runner forced to move up also advance one base. 

[ricka56]

22 hours ago, MidAmUmp said:

To put this thing to bed...

At the NCAA level, it's a balk & catcher's interference. R3 scores, all other runners advance on the balk & the batter is awarded 1st base on the catcher's interference.

WTG, Jefe