Balk Plus

[mstaylor]

I got this from a board in another country. I thought I would see what you guys have.

Bases loaded, no outs, pitcher blows through the stop, umpires yell balk but the pitcher pitches anyway. The batter swings, contacting the catcher's glove in the process, pops the ball up at second and the ball hits R2 standing on the base. What have you got? I know it's improbable but it's a good rule exercise.

[dawg-man]

What you have is a royal cluster but in Fed ball you have dead ball and runners advance one base. In anything other than Fed I would say you had catchers intereference and everyone including the batter get one base.

[UmpJM]

Michael,

Without knowing what happened after the ball hit R2, I don't see how anyone could answer your question.

JM

[Jboval]

well, the batter does not reach 1st safely due to the IFF, the ball hitting R2 is irrelevant since it is an IFF, and an IFF being the only time a runner can be hit by a batted ball in fair territory that hasn't passed an infielder other than the pitcher, the Catchers Int would normally be enforced since the batter did not reach first safely, but since that happened after the balk, I would say it is scored as a balk since everyone did not reach base safely, runners advance one, batter returns to bat with original count before 'balk' pitch was delivered. Or, the offense could elect to take the result of the play if R3 (or anyone else for that matter) scored and coach would like to count that run. No dead ball anywhere that I can see, with exception to FED, of course. i would suggest shutting up and watching what happens and sort it out later... what a cluster! lol

[UmpJM]

The only two possible outcomes (FED excluded, of course) is that the balk is enforced OR the CI is enforced.

JM

[BrianC14]

well, the batter does not reach 1st safely due to the IFF, the ball hitting R2 is irrelevant since it is an IFF, and an IFF being the only time a runner can be hit by a batted ball in fair territory that hasn't passed an infielder other than the pitcher, the Catchers Int would normally be enforced since the batter did not reach first safely, but since that happened after the balk, I would say it is scored as a balk since everyone did not reach base safely, runners advance one, batter returns to bat with original count before 'balk' pitch was delivered. Or, the offense could elect to take the result of the play if R3 (or anyone else for that matter) scored and coach would like to count that run. No dead ball anywhere that I can see, with exception to FED, of course. i would suggest shutting up and watching what happens and sort it out later... what a cluster! lol

There's your answer. You sort it out by getting the OM to state what preference he has, though there's still some "HTBT" issues to sort out. Likely the OM is going to want the balk enforced.

[Jboval]

ah... I did forget one thing, if the ball has not had a chance to be fielded by a defensive player other than the pitcher, then once it does hit R2, it would definitely be a dead ball. Oops!

[Jboval]

The only two possible outcomes (FED excluded, of course) is that the balk is enforced OR the CI is enforced.

JM

Or, the result of the play is taken. The really tricky question here is could you, or would you, as an OC, have the choice of choosing the CI (batter gets first, R3 scores) or the Balk (R3 scores, pitch doesnt count, runners advance and 1st base is left open, negating the possible double play ball, batter returns to plate)???:WTF

[BrianC14]

ah... I did forget one thing, if the ball has not had a chance to be fielded by a defensive player other than the pitcher, then once it does hit R2, it would definitely be a dead ball. Oops!

Then how can an IFF possibly be called? :WTF

[Jboval]

IFF is called as soon as the pop up is realized that it is indeed an IFF. Meaning that an infielder could of caught the ball, with ordinary effort. Doesn't mean he necessarily chose to try to catch it, just that it could of been caught if he had chosen to put forth the effort.

In other words, if there is this situation, and F4 bails out once he hears "IFF!", not trying for the catch and knowing that he might run into R2, and then the ball hits R2, then I have a dead ball. If F4 takes a stab at the ball, misses it, and it hits R2, then I have live ball. Again, all of this is highly unlikely, but there ya go. I see what you were saying though.

My question would be, if there is a shift on, and no one was around 2nd base, or 3rd base for that matter, to be able to make the infield catch, would it be ruled an IFF? I mean if they would of been in their position, they would of been able to make the catch with ordinary effort, yes? But the rule is supposed to be there to help the offense from being put in a bad situation right.. so if you did call IFF in that situation, it would actually of been better for the offense had you not, right?

Edited July 10, 2009 by Jboval

[UmpJM]

jboval,

I believe the way the sitch is "set up", it is meant to suggest that the batted ball is an IFF. If the R2 is in contact with his base when hit by an IFF, it's "nothing", live ball play the bounce.

So we have a balk, followed by a CI, followed by an IFF which is not caught.

Due to the IFF, we know that all runners did not advance safely on the play, because the batter was out of the IFF.

If the OM elects to "take the result of the play" on the CI, since not all runners advanced a base safely, the balk must be enforced.R3 to home, R2 to 3B, R1 to 2B, Batter back at the plate with the same count.

If the OM elects to take the CI penalty, the BR goes to 1B, all runners move up a base, and the balk is disregarded (because all runners DID advance one base safely).

JM

[Jboval]

jboval,

I believe the way the sitch is "set up", it is meant to suggest that the batted ball is an IFF. If the R2 is in contact with his base when hit by an IFF, it's "nothing", live ball play the bounce.

So we have a balk, followed by a CI, followed by an IFF which is not caught.

Due to the IFF, we know that all runners did not advance safely on the play, because the batter was out of the IFF.

If the OM elects to "take the result of the play" on the CI, since not all runners advanced a base safely, the balk must be enforced.R3 to home, R2 to 3B, R1 to 2B, Batter back at the plate with the same count.

If the OM elects to take the CI penalty, the BR goes to 1B, all runners move up a base, and the balk is disregarded (because all runners DID advance one base safely).

JM

I agree 100% with your solution, however, check your book again. Although the runner is not out for being hit by an IFF, the ball is indeed dead once it hits him, no runners may advance. You would not play the bounce, unless the IFF ball passed a fielder or was touched by a fielder, other than the pitcher.

[UmpJM]

jboval,

I stand corrected. The ball IS dead in this sitch.

JM

[Mr Umpire]

I have CI. The offense gets the play of the balk or batter on 1B and all runners move up 1 base thus meeting the exception to enforcing the balk. Since the ball hit R2, it is either the balk or CI. IFR may or may not have been called. If called, batter is out. If not, R2 is out. Thus the balk cannot be ignored if the offense takes the play.

So, CI is enforced first. Offense can take the balk or CI and batter on 1B. All runners moved up 1 base in either case. More than likely, they will take CI but may take the balk.

[mstaylor]

CI is the only answer that works, but you have a balk and an IF to figure. The only way the balk is ignored is if you enforce the CI.

[Umpire in Chief]

Heres what I've got:

Fed - Ball dead immediately on the balk.

OBR- You have to take the sequence of events.

1st was the balk, while the OP doesn't explicitly say the result of the play, with the ball hitting R2 on 2nd I feel safe in assuming not all runners advanced 1 base for the balk to be ignored.

2nd was the CI, once again the requirements to ignore this weren't met.

My call is the balk, runners advance, batter remains, because we havent met the requirement to ignore it and get to the CI issue, much less the IFF.

[Mr Umpire]

Heres what I've got:

Fed - Ball dead immediately on the balk.

OBR- You have to take the sequence of events.

1st was the balk, while the OP doesn't explicitly say the result of the play, with the ball hitting R2 on 2nd I feel safe in assuming not all runners advanced 1 base for the balk to be ignored.

2nd was the CI, once again the requirements to ignore this weren't met.

My call is the balk, runners advance, batter remains, because we havent met the requirement to ignore it and get to the CI issue, much less the IFF.

For OBR:

By enforcing the CI, the requirements for the balk would be met. Batter gets 1B and all runners would advance 1 base because the bases are loaded. B/c no outs can be recorded on CI if enforced.

So, that is why I have CI first. But, the offense gets the choice of the play which would be the balk. And, the umpire cannot take away the option of taking the play. That is not in the rules for CI.

CI which would be the requirements to ignore the balk. If offense takes the play, then they take the balk and the batter tries again.

[mstaylor]

What you have to remember is you leave the play live to let the play finish out to see if the balk gets nullified. The CI enforcement nullifies the balk so that is what you have to do.

[jnazz]

An IFF is allowed to hit the runner on second (specified in the rule book). I would enforce the Catchers Interference (the larger penalty) and nullify the balk. Everyone advances one base.

[Mr Umpire]

I think the option provided by CI is being overlooked. If the offense chooses the option, you cannot deny them of that. It is in the rules. So, if they take the option, then it is the balk. If they don't, it is CI and batter gets 1B and moving everyone up a base. Thus, meeting the criteria to ignore the balk. But, they still get that option.

[jnazz]

But no manager would ever take the balk, since on CI the batter would also move to first. But, if Barry Bonds is at the plate when this all happens I could see the balk argument.

[MCLEOD36]

Now this reminds me of HS, too much information.

IN FED, DB.

Other, the balk starts the sequence, thus play through it, ie either take the resulting play if one base is achieved or move runners, so you then look at the CI. OC then gets another option, if play doesnt result in BR to first; now look at INFLY (that is crap, no one would take that, so ignore it and DONT EVEN GO THERE). Thus OC says, I will take int, send BR to first and move the guys along. Calling IFF is just the umpire mechanic; like calling a strike, which is then dropped.

So, here is what you got. PU goes to OC and goes, IFF, BR is out and since no one moved, scratch. CI, move BR to 1B and all move 90 feet. No one was stealing on the play, so you dont have a balk/steal of home situation and no need for OC to take that.

He goes, I will take the CI and everyone moves forward. On the IFF call, I looked at that in more real time, when BU typically will make the IFF call and PU the CI call, thus can happen very quickly and / or almost simulataneously....

[Mr Umpire]

But no manager would ever take the balk, since on CI the batter would also move to first. But, if Barry Bonds is at the plate when this all happens I could see the balk argument.

Removing the CI has 2 scenarios to it.

First, good hitter gets a 2nd chance as you stated.

Second, it removes the DP. Scores 1 run, just like the CI. But, has a better chance of getting 2 runs and only getting 1 out. Such as a ball hit to F6/F4 with them playing back. Then, another run scores and only 1 out was recorded instead of 2 outs on 1 play.

Again, cannot deny CI options just to simplify the play. If the offense wants the play, then they get the balk with the hitter back up with the same count.

[Mr Umpire]

Other, the balk starts the sequence, thus play through it, ie either take the resulting play if one base is achieved or move runners, so you then look at the CI. OC then gets another option, if play doesnt result in BR to first; now look at INFLY (that is crap, no one would take that, so ignore it and DONT EVEN GO THERE). Thus OC says, I will take int, send BR to first and move the guys along. Calling IFF is just the umpire mechanic; like calling a strike, which is then dropped.

So, here is what you got. PU goes to OC and goes, IFF, BR is out and since no one moved, scratch. CI, move BR to 1B and all move 90 feet. No one was stealing on the play, so you dont have a balk/steal of home situation and no need for OC to take that.

I don't see IFR or the ball hitting R2 as an option of CI in this case. The balk nullifies both occurrences. So, if the OC takes the play, he is taking the balk. That is the result of taking the play. Not IFR or R2 out by being touched by the ball.

So, if OC says I want the play, he gets the balk with the batter coming back with the same count. By the rule that the balk cannot be ignored if all runners and the batter don't advance at least 1 base.

If he takes CI, then the balk is ignored b/c all runners and the batter moved up 1 base. Taking the CI is the only way to ignore the balk on this play. If he takes the play, then he takes the balk. No IFR or R2 out by the ball hitting him.

[Jboval]

Just picture this though... on the pop fly, F4 tries to catch the ball, missing it because he is in close proximity to R2. Ball then hits R2, bounces off him into shallow center, whereas he takes off for 3rd, R3 scores, and on the play at home from Center, R2 scores, and R1 moves to 3rd. Here is at least a situation that the OC would want to take the result of the CI, being two runs score, R1 now on 3rd, and B/R out on the IFF. Like I said before... what a cluster f*** I can't even imagine trying to sort this one out on the field in the heat of the moment!