Jump to content

Balk and Catcher Interference on a Steal of Home


johnnyg08
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 1838 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Who called the balk and what was it for?

The ball never crossed the plate (because the catcher jumped in front of it). Enforce both the CI and the balk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kylehutson said:

The ball never crossed the plate (because the catcher jumped in front of it). Enforce both the CI and the balk.

I can hear someone (I assume an umpire) yell "that's a balk" well before the ball reaches the plate.

 

If we enforce the balk, are we not letting the second run score?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the box score (UCF v Florida on 2/27/19), catcher’s interference was not called on this play and neither was a balk charged. The play-by-play shows that the UCF runner R3 (Mika) was credited with a SB and the R2 (Hernandez) scored on the pitcher’s throwing error (which of course makes no sense because this was a pitch from the rubber).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This play is on the arbiter. Rule 8-3p applies. The batter stepping out is irrelevant. The catcher catches the pitch before it reaches the plate. It’s a balk, and CI. Since the pitch wasn’t caught, it’s a delayed dead ball, and r2 is allowed to attempt to advance beyond 3b. Rule 9-3-penalty-note 3. NCAA says in this play, r2 called safe at home so he also scored, and batter should have been awarded 1b 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2017-18 NCAA rule 8-3p--If, on an attempted squeeze play or steal of home plate, the catcher steps on or in front of home plate without possession of the ball or touches the batter or the bat, the pitcher shall be charged with a balk and the catcher with interference.

PENALTY—The ball becomes dead, the batter shall be awarded first base on the interference, the run scores and all other runners advance one base.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, noumpere said:

I can hear someone (I assume an umpire) yell "that's a balk" well before the ball reaches the plate.

 

If we enforce the balk, are we not letting the second run score?

Balks are delayed dead balls... We wouldn't kill that play until the pitch was secured and action relaxed. Since R2 continued to run past his base that he would have been protected to, he is liable to be put out and the play must be allowed to continue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Richvee said:

This play is on the arbiter. Rule 8-3p applies. The batter stepping out is irrelevant. The catcher catches the pitch before it reaches the plate. It’s a balk, and CI. Since the pitch wasn’t caught, it’s a delayed dead ball, and r2 is allowed to attempt to advance beyond 3b. Rule 9-3-penalty-note 3. NCAA says in this play, r2 called safe at home so he also scored, and batter should have been awarded 1b 

So, if R2 is out at the plate, the out stands.  We then still enforce the CI and award the batter first. R3's run still counts.  Correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, JSam21 said:

Balks are delayed dead balls... We wouldn't kill that play until the pitch was secured and action relaxed. Since R2 continued to run past his base that he would have been protected to, he is liable to be put out and the play must be allowed to continue. 

Maybe.  ;)  That is, I understand balks are (usually) delayed dead balls in NCAA and OBR -- but my point was that since R2 advanced past third, we wouldn't "enforce the balk" as someone said.

 

AND, I thought I remembered, and thanks to Sr. Azul for confirming, the rule book said that in this instance the ball is dead -- which seemed too harsh for the offense.

12 minutes ago, humanbackstop19 said:

So, if R2 is out at the plate, the out stands.  We then still enforce the CI and award the batter first. R3's run still counts.  Correct?

Based on the interp apparently on the arbiter, yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, humanbackstop19 said:

So, if R2 is out at the plate, the out stands.  We then still enforce the CI and award the batter first. R3's run still counts.  Correct?

Yes they say that in the video 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, noumpere said:

 

 

AND, I thought I remembered, and thanks to Sr. Azul for confirming, the rule book said that in this instance the ball is dead -- which seemed too harsh for the offense.

Based on the interp apparently on the arbiter, yes.

The ball in this instance is not dead. 9.3 penalty note 3. 

If the balk is followed by a wild pitch that allows a runner to attempt to advance beyond the base that he had been awarded, the runner advances at his own risk; he is either safe or out as a result of the play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, noumpere said:

Who called the balk and what was it for?

Not sure who called it but there's a possible no stop or speed up of delivery, either of which I wouldn't have. But the pitcher normally holds the stop longer than he did in this play. They apparently acknowledged that balk and kept the batter at the plate with 0-0. So they didn't recognize the CI as has happened before when stuff like this happens. I think I recall two triple steals where the batter backed out and no CI was called while the catcher, in my opinion,  committed CI. Luckily R3 was safe in both so no harm no foul. Off topic if you watch the game the previous batter had a no call on a check swing that might have gone the other way. I don't know how I got there and whether you would have to have a cable subscription that allows the SEC network but this link got me the game and you can go to the top of the ninth: http://www.secsports.com/video/event/_/?airingId=f47af168-6284-4092-a24e-8bdd0a7d0a5a&replayId=740f446f-3b90-4941-b4aa-6c6e07be087d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Not sure who called it but there's a possible no stop or speed up of delivery, either of which I wouldn't have. But the pitcher normally holds the stop longer than he did in this play.

Shouldn't matter if he held the stop shorter or longer than "normal," just whether he made a complete stop or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...