Balk with catcher's interference

[jjskitours]

Bases loaded, one out, the BU calls a balk as B1 hits grounder to SS who steps on 2nd base for the force out, but throws wide to 1st base as B1 is safe. The PU called catcher's interference. Does the offensive coach have any option here or is the balk simply enforced and the CI ignored?

[Replacematt]

Bases loaded, one out, the BU calls a balk as B1 hits grounder to SS who steps on 2nd base for the force out, but throws wide to 1st base as B1 is safe. The PU called catcher's interference. Does the offensive coach have any option here or is the balk simply enforced and the CI ignored?

What ruleset?

[jjskitours]

OBR

[Replacematt]

OBR

CI is enforced, because it IS the balk penalty.

For a balk, we look at if all runners, including BR, advanced one base safely. While in the play they didn't, once we enforce the CI, they all do.

This actually becomes reflexive. If a dumb coach wants to take the play, we GOTO 10 and still enforce the CI penalty, since there is no provision for a runner to be put out before his advance base on a balk.

[mstaylor]

A coach gets no option on a balk. He does on a CI but in this case he doesn't because taking the play would go against the balk so you have to just enforce the CI penalty.

[jjskitours]

My understanding for the situation described is that once the runner is put out at 2nd you kill the action. The balk is

then enforced which advances all three runners 1 base and sends the B/R back to the plate. In a separate action you then

enforce the CI sending the B/R to the now open 1st base. I believe the coach still has the option and can keep the batter

up at the plate - might elect this if pitcher was next up or it was a Barry Bonds and they were still trailing by 3 runs.

[UmpTTS43]

Since all runners including the batter runner did not advance one base you enforce the CI by awarding batter 1st and forcing all other runners. This award negates the balk call since all runners including the batter runner advanced one base. Coach wants to take the play versus the CI penalty. On the play, since all runners including the batter runner did not advance one base, the balk is enforced. Runners advance, batter returned to plate with pitch nullified.

Take into account this play. R1R3. 0 out. F1 balks. F2 interferes with B1 during his swing. B1 grounds to F4 who tosses to F6 to force out R1 and F6 throws to F3 to complete the DP. R3 scores. Since all runners including the BR did not advance one base, you enforce the CI. R3 returned to 3rd, R1 to 2nd, BR to first. Since this penalty does not meet the requirements for disregarding a balk, all runners including BR advance one base, the balk is enforced. R3 scores, R1 to 2nd, BR returned to bat with pitch nullified. In this senario, the CI penalty does not come into play since the balk has to be enforced. There would be no option for the coach on this play.

[mstaylor]

My understanding for the situation described is that once the runner is put out at 2nd you kill the action. The balk is

then enforced which advances all three runners 1 base and sends the B/R back to the plate. In a separate action you then

enforce the CI sending the B/R to the now open 1st base. I believe the coach still has the option and can keep the batter

up at the plate - might elect this if pitcher was next up or it was a Barry Bonds and they were still trailing by 3 runs.

If the play with CI satisfies the balk requirement then the balk goes away. The coach gets an option on CI but if one doesn't elliminate the balk then that option doesn't exist. So if none of the options kills the balk then it reverts to the balk. The balk is not an option the coach gets.

Consider this:

R2,R3, one out. The batter pops to center but is interfered with by the catcher and the pitcher balked. R3 tags and scores, R2 tags and holds, F8 catches the ball.

Option one is a straight enforcement, R2 and R3 are not forced but the BR is awarded first. Balk is still in effect so this is a viable option.

Option two is take the play. Balk is still in effect because the BR is out and R2 didn't advance so this isn't a viable option.

Option three is not an option for the coach, it is necessitated by the rules, enforce the balk.

[jjskitours]

My understanding as I gave it to you comes from a fellow umpire who just completed the Jim Evans 5 week camp in Orlando.

He says they ran this drill a number of times. As I stated once the runner at 2nd is out you kill the play because the balk must

be enforced since all runners did not advance. After the balk is enforced with the 3 base runners advancing one base and the

B/R in effect coming back to the plate you then enforce the CI which in this case sends the batter to 1st and yes the coach

could elect to not take the CI and bring the batter back to the plate.

This same theory would apply if after a balk the B/R was obstructed going to 1st. First enforce the balk and then the obstruction.

Unless someone has a case book or interpretation to support another ruling on this, I'll go with the JE camp should I ever be

faced with this situation.

[UmpTTS43]

Unless Jim changed his stance, my senarios follow what I was taught at his school. If there is a play following a balk, you must let the play play out to it's completion, including awards, since the awards could possibly nullify the balk. CI falls into the "or otherwise" wording in the Penalty section of 8.05. Usually with CI you let the play play through it's entirety, including outs being made, because in the end the coach will have an option. When a balk happens with CI, as soon as an out is recorded you kill it because 1} only the balk will be enforced or 2} the two options will be a} enforcing the balk or b} enforcing the CI. As in your original OP with bases loaded, once you enforce the CI penalty, the balk is disregarded since the criteria was met. Coach now has an option. If you have an OP such as my second one or mstaylor's, the enforcement of the CI penalty does not satisfy the requirements for disregarding a balk, hence the balk is enforced.

I agree that you kill it immediately. I did not state that in my earlier post.

This same theory would apply if after a balk the B/R was obstructed going to 1st. First enforce the balk and then the obstruction.

That is not always the case. If the award of first to the BR forces all other runners, then yes. If, however, the award does not force all other runners, the play would be disregarded and the balk enforced. R3. F1 balks in his delivery. Ball is hit to the right of F3. As F3 fields the ball, F1 goes to cover 1st base and obstructs BR while F3 makes the out on BR. R3 stayed at third. "Time" is called at the time of the obstruction. The award to the BR would have R3R1. Criteria not met for nullifying the balk, so balk is enforced. Instead of enforcing the balk then awarding BR 1st only to bring him back again, I say make the award first. If it nullifies the balk, so be it. If it doesn't, bring him back and enforce the balk. Two differing views, same outcome.

If, instead of R3 you have R1 and the same senario, there is no need to enforce the balk because the award nullifies it. Just make the award and go on.

[jjskitours]

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on the mechanics. This is fresh off the press - the course was just completed. Balk is FIRST to be enforced when criteria for ignoring a balk are not met (R1 out at 2nd). You stated above that "when a balk happens with CI, as soon as an out is recorded you kill it because 1) only the balk will be enforced" - NOT TRUE "or 2) the two options will be a) enforcing the balk OR B) enforcing the CI" - NOT TRUE. There is no either or for my OP, it is BOTH. Since same outcome (with runners forced) why not be consistent and always enforce the balk penalty when on the play all runners and the B-R do not advance since it occurs 1st and then make award for CI.

[UmpTTS43]

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on the mechanics. This is fresh off the press - the course was just completed. Balk is FIRST to be enforced when criteria for ignoring a balk are not met (R1 out at 2nd). You stated above that "when a balk happens with CI, as soon as an out is recorded you kill it because 1) only the balk will be enforced" - NOT TRUE "or 2) the two options will be a) enforcing the balk OR B) enforcing the CI" - NOT TRUE. There is no either or for my OP, it is BOTH. Since same outcome (with runners forced) why not be consistent and always enforce the balk penalty when on the play all runners and the B-R do not advance since it occurs 1st and then make award for CI.

I don't understand the "NOT TRUE" statement. You did not read my post in it's entirety. If you have R1 with CI and a balk with R1 out on the force, the ball is dead immediately when the out on R1 occurs. In my interpretation I have the enforcement of the penalty as a continuation of the play. I can understand where others do not. Differnce of opinion. Per the penaly for CI, BR awarded 1st and R1 forced to 2nd on the award. Balk is disregarded since all runners including the BR have advanced one base. I believe that you cannot discriminate the penalty due to "what occurs first", since you are dealing with a balk situation followed by a play, you have to consider the play before you consider the balk. You cannot have "BOTH". Either one is enforced or the other. You cannot enforce the balk penalty when the awards advance all runners, blah blah blah, has been met. My point is that you have to award bases as a result of the play before you take into consideraltion of the balk. As I stated before, this falls into the "or otherwise" statement outlined in the Penalty in 8.05. I do not see the advantage of enforcing the balk prior to the awards as a result of the play. My reasoning for not enforcing the balk first is because you have to award bases based on the play in it's entirety. Once that happens you can discern what actions are to be taken. Enforce the play, determine the outcome and placement of the runners, if certain criteria are not met, enforce the balk. If this is what Evans is currently teaching, it wouldn't be the first time we disagreed.

God I love discussions like this.

[Haid D' Salaami]

OBR

CI is enforced, because it IS the balk penalty.

For a balk, we look at if all runners, including BR, advanced one base safely. While in the play they didn't, once we enforce the CI, they all do.

This actually becomes reflexive. If a dumb coach wants to take the play, we GOTO 10 and still enforce the CI penalty, since there is no provision for a runner to be put out before his advance base on a balk.

what are you talking about.... maybe the BU saw something else....

[Haid D' Salaami]

what happens if the BU calls a balk, but there is CI.... so there can be a difference... as the BU if there is balk followed by a play ( say R1 and a ground ball to F6 who throws to 2nd to retire R1 ) BU would kill the play and award the balk....

But the Plate umpire is gonna have CI.. in this play you will have to talk to your partner...

At PBUC we had a Drill field and one of the plays was R2 not stealing, F1 balked and delivered the pitch, there was CI on the play.. ground ball to F4 who threw to 1st to retire BR...there was lotss of talk on how to enforce this play, saome said give coach the option, enforce CI..etc..

but since the on the CI not all runner including BR had advanced one base safely, we had to enforce the Balk... R2 went to 3rd, and BR back to bat, even though there was CI..

you have to take what happen in order... and the rules.. ask your self the question?.. on a balk, did all runners inculding BR advance one base safely?..if not call time and award base..

on CI did all runners including BR advance one base safely.. alot of times on CI this will not happen...foul balls, pop ups, runners out..

[Haid D' Salaami]

Bases loaded, one out, the BU calls a balk as B1 hits grounder to SS who steps on 2nd base for the force out, but throws wide to 1st base as B1 is safe. The PU called catcher's interference. Does the offensive coach have any option here or is the balk simply enforced and the CI ignored?

I think the play your thinking of is on a squeeze play and R3 coming home, the catcher interferes with the batter...and the pitcher is charged with a balk.. this play has to awards on it.. CI and a balk.

play: R3, R2..squeeze play..runner is coming home and pitcher delivers the ball to the plate, cather steps out in front of the plate to catch the pitch and in doing so interferes with the batters attempt to hit the pitch....R2 was not stealing ont he play..... ruling... CI on F2..Batter awarded 1st cause of CI, R3 scores cause of the balk, and R2 advances to 3rd cause of the balk.

[Haid D' Salaami]

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on the mechanics. This is fresh off the press - the course was just completed. Balk is FIRST to be enforced when criteria for ignoring a balk are not met (R1 out at 2nd). You stated above that "when a balk happens with CI, as soon as an out is recorded you kill it because 1) only the balk will be enforced" - NOT TRUE "or 2) the two options will be a) enforcing the balk OR B) enforcing the CI" - NOT TRUE. There is no either or for my OP, it is BOTH. Since same outcome (with runners forced) why not be consistent and always enforce the balk penalty when on the play all runners and the B-R do not advance since it occurs 1st and then make award for CI.

You cannot have "BOTH". Either one is enforced or the other.

God I love discussions like this.

there is only one time where you will have a balk and CI ont he same play.. read my post above this, and see the play..

I agree i love rules discussions... :hopmad:

[Fittske24]

Let’s think about this logically. The parameters for enforcing a balk are as follows: 8.05 (Penalty)

The ball is dead, and each runner shall advance one base without liability to be put out, unless the batter reaches first on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, in which case the play proceeds without reference to the balk.

As you can see, one of the keys to enforcing or disregarding a balk, is “all other runners advance at least one base.†Also note there is no reference to “coaches choice†when enforcing a balk.

Now let’s look at the enforcement of Catcher’s Interference: 6.08 (C )

If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference.

Now, Let’s break down take the Original Play:

• Bases loaded, one out, the BU calls a balk. – in order to disregard the balk, all runners including the batter runner must advance at least 1 base.
  
• as B1 hits grounder to SS who steps on 2nd base for the force out, but throws wide to 1st base as B1 is safe. – Since R1 was put out, the Balk can now be enforced. Typically when a ball is put in play on a balk and once it is determined that all runners including the batter runner will not advance 1 base, the play is immediately killed but…
  
• The PU called catcher's interference. – CI is simply adds a secondary element to the play following the balk. Remember, to ignore CI, all runners including the batter runner must advance 1 base. Since R1 is retired, CI can be enforced. This would mean BR goes to first and all other runners advance if forced, in this case, R3 would score. This action also nullifies the Balk since all runners including the batter runner would advance 1 base.
  

Now, let’s say the coach decides he wants to take the play instead of the CI. This would mean that the result of the play would give you 2 outs, R3 scores, R2 goes to 3^rd, R1 is out at 2^nd and BR is now on first. But….Remember we had a balk on the play which requires “all runners including the batter runner must advance 1 base.†Since this does not happen because R1 was put out at 2^nd, we would enforce the Balk.

[mstaylor]

So in my example with the three options, are you agreeing or disagreeing?

[Replacematt]

OBR

CI is enforced, because it IS the balk penalty.

For a balk, we look at if all runners, including BR, advanced one base safely. While in the play they didn't, once we enforce the CI, they all do.

This actually becomes reflexive. If a dumb coach wants to take the play, we GOTO 10 and still enforce the CI penalty, since there is no provision for a runner to be put out before his advance base on a balk.

what are you talking about.... maybe the BU saw something else....

???

[UmpTTS43]

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on the mechanics. This is fresh off the press - the course was just completed. Balk is FIRST to be enforced when criteria for ignoring a balk are not met (R1 out at 2nd). You stated above that "when a balk happens with CI, as soon as an out is recorded you kill it because 1) only the balk will be enforced" - NOT TRUE "or 2) the two options will be a) enforcing the balk OR B) enforcing the CI" - NOT TRUE. There is no either or for my OP, it is BOTH. Since same outcome (with runners forced) why not be consistent and always enforce the balk penalty when on the play all runners and the B-R do not advance since it occurs 1st and then make award for CI.

You cannot have "BOTH". Either one is enforced or the other.

God I love discussions like this.

there is only one time where you will have a balk and CI ont he same play.. read my post above this, and see the play..

I agree i love rules discussions...

In your play, the penalty includes charging the pitcher with a balk in order to further penalize the defense. It is the CI that causes the balk to be enforced.

[UmpTTS43]

So in my example with the three options, are you agreeing or disagreeing?

In your example there is only one conclusion to your play. Enforce the balk.

[Haid D' Salaami]

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on the mechanics. This is fresh off the press - the course was just completed. Balk is FIRST to be enforced when criteria for ignoring a balk are not met (R1 out at 2nd). You stated above that "when a balk happens with CI, as soon as an out is recorded you kill it because 1) only the balk will be enforced" - NOT TRUE "or 2) the two options will be a) enforcing the balk OR B) enforcing the CI" - NOT TRUE. There is no either or for my OP, it is BOTH. Since same outcome (with runners forced) why not be consistent and always enforce the balk penalty when on the play all runners and the B-R do not advance since it occurs 1st and then make award for CI.

You cannot have "BOTH". Either one is enforced or the other.

God I love discussions like this.

there is only one time where you will have a balk and CI ont he same play.. read my post above this, and see the play..

I agree i love rules discussions...

In your play, the penalty includes charging the pitcher with a balk in order to further penalize the defense. It is the CI that causes the balk to be enforced.

no in this play it is both that are awarded...

R3, R2.. squeeze play.. CI is called, and so is the balk...R3 awarded Home, R2 awarded 3rd.. BR awarded 1st on the CI...

better read the rule.

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.

[UmpTTS43]

no in this play it is both that are awarded...

R3, R2.. squeeze play.. CI is called, and so is the balk...R3 awarded Home, R2 awarded 3rd.. BR awarded 1st on the CI...

better read the rule.

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.

Exactly, multiple penalties. Same as 7.07. You can have F2 interfere with the batter without his actions being "balkable" otherwise. But since R3 is attempting to score, the added penalty of charging a balk to the pitcher is included. The proper mechanic is to call "Time, that's interference." Then enforce the penalties. You don't call out the CI and the balk. If R3 was not trying to score, it would just be CI with no balk.

My quote

You cannot have "BOTH". Either one is enforced or the other.

was in regards to the plays at hand. By bringing in a totally different play you have misunderstood what I meant.

[AZump78]

God I love discussions like this.

AMEN.

This is where I think people could get the most out of posting (and reading posts) on here. And the way the rules of baseball are written, there are a LOT of situations like this that are worth dissecting-and even debating. It makes me sad a thread about washing gear or hemming pants appears more often than interesting rulings or knotty plays someone experienced on the field.

[Don]

Balk came first, if conditions are not met to ignore it then enforce it. CI is not one of the conditions so can't be the penalty that makes the balk ok to ignore. CI came second.