Balk conundrum

[Guest EricT]

OBR in effect, extra innings, home team trailing by 1 run, and batting with 1 out and a runner on 2nd. The runner takes off for 3rd as the pitcher fails to come set while delivering the pitch. The umpires signal balk, and the batter hits a ground ball into the 5-6 hole with the ball glancing off the shortstop's glove. The runner rounds 3rd and heads for home. The shortstop picks up the ball and throws the runner out at home.

Immediately after hitting the ground ball, the batter trips and is very slow in advancing to 1st base. So, after applying the tag on the runner, the catcher has a chance to throw to 1st for the 3rd out of the inning.

However, the catcher is a future umpire and realizes that if the batter does not reach 1st base, the balk penalty will be enforced, and thus nullify the 2nd and 3rd outs. So, he simply holds on to the ball. But, the batter is also a future umpire and accordingly refuses to advance to 1st base. 

Have I described this conundrum correctly? If so, what should the umpires do?

[BigBlue4u]

 I'd say this is a classic 8.01c.  So, what I would do, right or wrong, is declare the batter-runner out for failing to properly advance.  That would be the third out. Half-inning over. The out at home would stand because the runner advanced at least one base on the balk.

[JonnyCat]

7 minutes ago, BigBlue4u said:

 I'd say this is a classic 8.01c.  So, what I would do, right or wrong, is declare the batter-runner out for failing to properly advance.  That would be the third out. Half-inning over. The out at home would stand because the runner advanced at least one base on the balk.

If you called the batter runner out, wouldn't you would have to enforce the balk? R2 gets 3rd, and BR is still up to bat with whatever count he had prior to the balk.

The balk rule says that in order for you to ignore the balk, 2 things must happen. BR must reach 1st base safely, and all other runners must advance at least 1 base safely. In your situation, BR did not reach 1B safely. I'm not sure you get to keep the out on R2.

I think you would have a better chance of calling the BR out for abandonment, although after reading the rules on abandonment, I'm still not sure that would apply. However, if you did call the BR out for abandonment, I think you still would have R2 awarded 3rd, and BR back up to bat.

I could be wrong, and I'm sure smarter people than me will weigh in. At least I hope.

[SH0102]

55 minutes ago, BigBlue4u said:

 I'd say this is a classic 8.01c.  So, what I would do, right or wrong, is declare the batter-runner out for failing to properly advance.  That would be the third out. Half-inning over. The out at home would stand because the runner advanced at least one base on the balk.

Both players are trying to use the rules to their advantage, kudos to them.

But the batter holds the cards here since they obviously can not both get what they want.

Batter would be out for abandonment and thus, you can not ignore the balk.

I don’t have the rule book in front of me, but it says all runners (including BR) must advance in order to nullify a balk on a ball in play.

I do not recall any clause about how the batter not reaching first would impact this balk rule

[JonnyCat]

11 minutes ago, SH0102 said:

Batter would be out for abandonment and thus, you can not enforce the balk.

If BR doesn't reach base safely, wouldn't you enforce the balk?

[SH0102]

7 minutes ago, JonnyCat said:

If BR doesn't reach base safely, wouldn't you enforce the balk?

Yep, good ol typo from the phone !

[Ruben]

This is an interesting what I assume is a hypothetical situation, but I saw very similar play actually happen: 

Very low level ball, about 14 year old players, essentially OBR rules (i.e., not the NFHS balk is always a dead ball rule).  R1, R2, less than 2 outs. Runners stealing on the pitch, and U1 calls a no-balk pause while the pitch is being delivered. The batter starts his swing, hears the balk call and stops - but with a check swing still hits the ball just over first base.  Both runners stop running and walk to their next base, while PU emphatically points that the ball is fair. The first baseman is slowly walking towards the ball, and the 3rd base coach realizes what's happening, and tells R2 (now at 3rd base) to go home.  The defensive coach yells at the first baseman to get the ball and throw it home, and he does and the catcher tags R2 for the out. Meanwhile... the batter is very confused and is sort of half jogging slowly towards first base until his dugout starts imploring him to run. He finally starts to run towards first base and just before he gets there.... the first base coach jumps in his way and basically tackles him to prevent him from getting to first base!  U1 sees this and immediately says "that's coach assistance -  batter is out.... TIME!", followed by a long discussion with his partner and they enforce the balk, undo both outs, and put runners on 2nd and 3rd with the batter still at the plate.

The most surprising thing about all of this, is I didn't see ANY coach from either team question what was going on. I think they were all so confused, they just accepted it.  I'm guessing the first base coach was the only budding umpire out of the bunch.

 

[JonnyCat]

3 hours ago, SH0102 said:

Yep, good ol typo from the phone !

That's what I thought. 

Is that how you would rule, though? Call the BR out for abandonment, enforce the balk? BR back to bat, and R2 to 3rd?

I think that's how I would rule. Seems the cleanest outcome for a very non-standard play.

[SH0102]

7 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

That's what I thought. 

Is that how you would rule, though? Call the BR out for abandonment, enforce the balk? BR back to bat, and R2 to 3rd?

I think that's how I would rule. Seems the cleanest outcome for a very non-standard play.

That’s what I’ve got…there’s no caveat in rule book that says the exception to enforcing balk (all runners and batter advance) is ignored if the out if by way of abandonment .

Easiest way I can think of it is, the defense committed the illegal act (balk). The offense is not under an obligation to let them get away with it. 

[beerguy55]

10 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

That's what I thought. 

Is that how you would rule, though? Call the BR out for abandonment, enforce the balk? BR back to bat, and R2 to 3rd?

I think that's how I would rule. Seems the cleanest outcome for a very non-standard play.

You really wouldn't even have to call the batter "out, would you?   The rule is the batter didn't didn't reach first.   When it's obvious the batter has no intent of advancing simply kill the play and enforce the balk - he didn't reach first...The "out" is going to get undone anyway.    Besides, it can't be abandonment, as he never reached first - I think some case plays refer to it as "desertion"? 

I suppose if the batter really wanted to make the point, he'd enter DBT and go sit on the bench....that would force the issue....which then begs the question...what if F2 throws the ball out of play to force the issue, thereby awarding BR second base.  I think the same outcome applies...BR just goes and sits on the bench.

This is the defense's infraction - between R3, 1 out and R1, 2 out only one of those is palatable.

 

 

 

 

[noumpere]

Who caused the problem in the first place?  The defense for balking.  Make the 9.01(c) ruling that reflects that.

[Jimurray]

29 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

You really wouldn't even have to call the batter "out, would you?   The rule is the batter didn't didn't reach first.   When it's obvious the batter has no intent of advancing simply kill the play and enforce the balk - he didn't reach first...The "out" is going to get undone anyway.    Besides, it can't be abandonment, as he never reached first - I think some case plays refer to it as "desertion"? 

I suppose if the batter really wanted to make the point, he'd enter DBT and go sit on the bench....that would force the issue....which then begs the question...what if F2 throws the ball out of play to force the issue, thereby awarding BR second base.  I think the same outcome applies...BR just goes and sits on the bench.

This is the defense's infraction - between R3, 1 out and R1, 2 out only one of those is palatable.

 

 

 

 

In OBR a walkoff BOB requires the batter to advance to 1B and if he refuses he will be called out. So a batter can be called out for refusing to accept a base award. I wonder if that would apply to the batter if he was awarded 2B. That throw out of play might be a smart move especially if it happened in live action without the appearance of premeditation.

[Mudisfun]

Heck... put the next batter in the box and tell them to pitch. Get one pitch and if the original batter has not gotten to 1st, throw down, call him out and the balk can not longer be enforced since a subsequent play occurred. Is there a rule which says the defense HAS to play on a runner who has not achieved 1st yet? The rules say the offense needs to run the bases legally, but is there an actual requirement that the batter runner achieve 1st before putting the next batter in the box?

The defense screwed up, I agree, but no reason we have to let the offense make a mockery of the situation as well.

 

 

 

 

[BigBlue4u]

Based on a lot of other input, I would now be inclined to call the batter out for failure to advance, enforce the balk, put R2 back on 3B and bring the batter back to the plate.  

 

 

[MadMax]

12 minutes ago, BigBlue4u said:

Based on a lot of other input, I would now be inclined to call the batter out for failure to advance, enforce the balk, put R2 back on 3B and bring the batter back to the plate.

Just cleaning up the verbiage for ya... 

"call the batter out for failure to advance" – switch "failure" to "refusal". There is no clock here... so it's not like the defense is holding on to the ball, refusing to tag or put out BR so as to exhaust the clock; conversely, it's not like the BR is purposely not proceeding to 1B to, again, exhaust a/the clock. There is no clock, there is no "time imperative". Once a ball is "Live", something outlined in the Rules has to occur for it to become Dead... there is no play clock. And, according to the proposed play, none of those events has occurred yet. However, there is a degree of latitude and interpretation for umpires to do what you're suggesting – call the BR out for refusing a/the umpire's direction. If we simply say "failure", then we're being too vague, because what if the BR is incapacitated / injured / unaware so as to go to 1B "directly"? What if we were to have an instance wherein the batter bangs a rocket comebacker off F1's head? And, the ball falls to the ground uncaught, but (being amateurs, perhaps) everyone (including the BR, aghast at his own hit) stops to immediately rush to and attend to the affected F1? 

Are we going to call the BR Out once we complete the attention given to F1? ... 🤔 Well, technically and literally, he "failed" to go to 1B. Sooooo... 

I'm simply saying clean up the vernacular. Words matter. 

"Enforce the Balk" – good, good. Just a reminder, we must enforce the Balk; there is no "Option". 

"Put R2 back on 3B" – switch "put R2 back" to "award R2 3rd base". On a Balk, technically, there is no "placing" (or putting) of Runners. There is "awarding". It may seem pedantic and particular, but it has its purpose. 

"Bring the batter back to the plate" works, but I would further explain, if necessary or requested, that by Rule, a Batter's at-bat continues if/when he is put Out or called Out prior to achieving 1B on a Balk call. 

[Velho]

Nice and tidy then:

To runner/batter: "Are you going to run?"

R/B "Nope" --> "Time! You [point at B/R] in the box. You [point at R2] to third base"

If B/R runs, see if he makes it to 1B and respond accordingly (if F2 is serious he'll hold the ball).