Don't enforce the balk

[umpire_scott]

So I had a situation a few years ago where R2 was stealing on the play (no other runners), pitcher balks and it is ball 4 on the batter.  I thought that since the BR advanced on ball 4 and R2 advanced on the steal that the balk would not be enforced.  But an experienced umpire told me that actually that situation was covered in an interpretations manual and because R2 stealing was independent of the pitched ball that the balk would be enforced.  Basically the interpretation being that BR and all runners had to advance as a result of the pitch.  

So our UIC sent around a rules test in preparation or our upcoming clinics.  In the sitch he sent around it was all the same except instead of it being ball 4 it was catcher's interference.  To me since in CI R2 would not get third base, unless he successfully completed the steal these two scenarios are exactly the same.  Yet our rules test answer said that the balk would not be enforced because BR and all runners advanced a base. 

[Senor Azul]

From the 2016 BRD (section 308, p. 205):

OBR Official Interpretation:  Wendelstedt:  If the penalty for catcher’s interference is enforced, runners who were attempting a legitimate steal on the play will be awarded the bases they were attempting to take…

FED:  Whenever the catcher or any other defensive player obstructs the batter, if the penalty is not ignored the batter is awarded first, and runners advancing on the pitch or forced also receive one base. Runners who are moving on the pitch keep their advance bases if the catcher’s obstruction penalty is enforced.

[umpire_scott]

3 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

From the 2016 BRD (section 308, p. 205):

OBR Official Interpretation:  Wendelstedt:  If the penalty for catcher’s interference is enforced, runners who were attempting a legitimate steal on the play will be awarded the bases they were attempting to take…

FED:  Whenever the catcher or any other defensive player obstructs the batter, if the penalty is not ignored the batter is awarded first, and runners advancing on the pitch or forced also receive one base. Runners who are moving on the pitch keep their advance bases if the catcher’s obstruction penalty is enforced.

We use OBR rules.  And I don't believe the Wendelstedt interp listed is relevant.  Runners who steal on ball 4 are also entitled to the base.  I need the interp about balks and runners stealing not CI and runners stealing.

[Senor Azul]

The 2018 Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual in a section titled Calling “Time” After a Balk tells us—

3. If the balk is followed by a pitch that is caught by the catcher, call “Time” the moment the catcher catches the ball. (Note the exception in “Ball Four” situations covered in case 5 below.)

5. If the balk is followed by “Ball Four” delivered to the batter and is caught by the catcher, call “Time” and enforce the balk unless all runners advance one base because of “Ball Four.” In that situation, play proceeds without reference to the balk.

If the balk is followed by catcher’s interference, the umpire must address the catcher interference first before considering enforcing the balk.

If all runners including the batter-runner advance one base after enforcing the catcher’s interference penalty, the balk is ignored. If all runners including the batter-runner DO NOT advance one base after enforcing the interference penalty, the balk is enforced and the manager has no option to take the interference penalty.

Play 1:  Runner on second is stealing third base on a 1-1 pitch when a balk is called. The batter swings and misses at the pitch but the catcher interferes with the batter’s swing.

Ruling 1:  The penalty for catcher’s interference would award the batter-runner first base and the runner from second to third because the runner was stealing on the pitch when the catcher interfered. Since both runners advanced one base after the enforcement of the interference penalty, the balk is ignored. However, if the runner from second was not stealing on the pitch, the balk penalty would have to be enforced since the runner from second would not be awarded third base.

[noumpere]

9 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

The 2018 Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual in a section titled Calling “Time” After a Balk tells us—

3. If the balk is followed by a pitch that is caught by the catcher, call “Time” the moment the catcher catches the ball. (Note the exception in “Ball Four” situations covered in case 5 below.)

5. If the balk is followed by “Ball Four” delivered to the batter and is caught by the catcher, call “Time” and enforce the balk unless all runners advance one base because of “Ball Four.” In that situation, play proceeds without reference to the balk.

 

I highlighted a different part of the relevant play.  It's the same as saying "because the runners were forced to advance."  In Scott's OP, the runner advanced on a steal, not because he was forced due to the walk.  One is an award; one is not. Thus, the different rulings.

[Senor Azul]

Mr. noumpere, here is what Mr. umpire_scott actually said in his OP—“R2 was stealing on the play (no other runners), pitcher balks and it is ball 4 on the batter.” The runner had not acquired his advance base before the time of pitch, before the balk, or before time should have been called which was soon as the catcher caught the pitch.

Mr. umpire_scott also said this in his OP--Runners who steal on ball 4 are also entitled to the base. You don’t agree with that, do you?

[noumpere]

4 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

Mr. noumpere, here is what Mr. umpire_scott actually said in his OP—“R2 was stealing on the play (no other runners), pitcher balks and it is ball 4 on the batter.” The runner had not acquired his advance base before the time of pitch, before the balk, or before time should have been called which was soon as the catcher caught the pitch.

Mr. umpire_scott also said this in his OP--Runners who steal on ball 4 are also entitled to the base. You don’t agree with that, do you?

Nom I do not agree wth Scott.  I am pointing out (or trying to) how his play is different from the CI-and-steal pla yand from the R1, R2 steal play (where the steal doesn't matter).

[Senor Azul]

Then, Mr. noumpere, I have to admit I do not understand what you are trying to say. I read Mr. umpire-scott’s original post as only having an R2 in each scenario—“R2 was stealing on the play (no other runners).”

I think Mr. umpire_scott is operating under the misapprehension that a runner who is attempting to steal on a balk gets to keep that advance base instead of the play being nullified by the balk.

[JSam21]

34 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

Then, Mr. noumpere, I have to admit I do not understand what you are trying to say. I read Mr. umpire-scott’s original post as only having an R2 in each scenario—“R2 was stealing on the play (no other runners).”

I think Mr. umpire_scott is operating under the misapprehension that a runner who is attempting to steal on a balk gets to keep that advance base instead of the play being nullified by the balk.

R2 would remain on 3rd but because of the balk and the batter remains at bat with a 3 ball count. The reasoning, The result of the pitch is that the BR is awarded 1st and R2 did not get to 3rd base as a result of the BR being awarded 1st on the walk...  

[noumpere]

16 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

 

I think Mr. umpire_scott is operating under the misapprehension that a runner who is attempting to steal on a balk gets to keep that advance base instead of the play being nullified by the balk.

I agree