Balk Call for not coming set but the pitcher delivers the baseball

[LDS]

When calling a balk on a pitcher that doesn't come set, 80% of the time the pitcher delivers the pitch anyway.

When that happens, I know it's a live ball if the batter hits the pitch and the offense gets to choose if it is balk or not  based on the outcome of the play.  If the batter doesn't swing or swings and misses what is the call?

I've heard that it is a ball regardless, I've heard it's only a ball if it's ball four otherwise count remains the same and I've also heard it is nothing, count remains the same.

It is USSSA baseball rules.  Can someone help clarify this for me?

[noumpere]

6 minutes ago, LDS said:

When that happens, I know it's a live ball if the batter hits the pitch and the offense gets to choose if it is balk or not  based on the outcome of the play. 

 

What you "know" is NOT correct.  There is no choice on this.

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

 

So, if the pitch is ball four and all runners are forced, count the pitch.

If the pitch is not ball four, advance the runners and it's "no pitch" to the batter.

If the batter hits the ball and the batter and all runners advance, keep the play and ignore the balk.

If the batter and all runners do not advance a base, enforce the balk (advance the runners) and return the batter to the plate with the same count.

[CricketChapman]

There is no "option" on this play.  If as a result of the pitch all runners (including BR) advance one base, the balk is ignored.  Otherwise, the ball is dead and the balk is enforced.

OBR 6.02(a) PENALTY.

[Jimurray]

26 minutes ago, CricketChapman said:

There is no "option" on this play.  If as a result of the pitch all runners (including BR) advance one base, the balk is ignored.  Otherwise, the ball is dead and the balk is enforced.

OBR 6.02(a) PENALTY.

There is one other possibility where the balk is acknowledged for the batter and ignored for the runner/s. A wild pitch that was not ball 4 or strike three. Runners may advance more than 1 base at their own risk and the play is not dead until the pitch is secured and returned to the infield and all runners have stopped trying to advance. 

[LDS]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

What you "know" is NOT correct.  There is no choice on this.

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

 

So, if the pitch is ball four and all runners are forced, count the pitch.

If the pitch is not ball four, advance the runners and it's "no pitch" to the batter.

If the batter hits the ball and the batter and all runners advance, keep the play and ignore the balk.

If the batter and all runners do not advance a base, enforce the balk (advance the runners) and return the batter to the plate with the same count.

Thank you.  That makes perfect sense!  

[Velho]

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

There is one other possibility where the balk is acknowledged for the batter and ignored for the runner/s. A wild pitch that was not ball 4 or strike three. Runners may advance more than 1 base at their own risk and the play is not dead until the pitch is secured and returned to the infield and all runners have stopped trying to advance. 

Can you clarify what you mean? Are you saying in event of "R1, R2; 1-0 count; balk with wild pitch for ball 2; R1 & R2 advance to home and 3B" we ignore the balk and let R2 score, R1 on 3B, and batter still up w/ 2-0 count?

[Jimurray]

27 minutes ago, Velho said:

Can you clarify what you mean? Are you saying in event of "R1, R2; 1-0 count; balk with wild pitch for ball 2; R1 & R2 advance to home and 3B" we ignore the balk and let R2 score, R1 on 3B, and batter still up w/ 2-0 count?

No, count stays at 1-0. That's one sit and there are others. @noumpere went to the trouble of citing "When to call time on a balk" from the PBUC/MLBUM some years ago. You should read the whole thing but (8) tells when to "acknowledge" a balk. The common phrase that a balk is either "ignored or enforced" ignores that a balk can be acknowledged:

 

"7.9 CALLING "TIME" AFTER A BALK
The penalty for balk allows the play to proceed without reference to the balk if the batter and all
runners advance one base on the pitch following the balk (i.e., the actual pitch and/or action
caused by the batter hitting the ball). The umpire shall not call "Time" until play stops following
the balk. The question therefore arises as to when the umpire is to call "Time" to kill the ball
after calling a balk. The following cases should help explain when play is considered "stopped"
and a what moment the umpire should call "Time" following the call of balk:
(1) If the pitcher balks and does not throw the ball, call "That's a balk; Time!" and enforce the
balk.
(2) If the balk is followed by a batted ball, leave the ball in play until it is apparent that the batter
and all runners will not advance one base. At that moment, call "Time" and enforce the balk.
If, however, the batter reaches first base and all runners advance at least one base on play
following the balk, play proceeds without reference to the balk.
EXAMPLES:
(a) If a batted ball follows the balk and results in a fly ball that is caught, call "Time" the
moment the fly ball is caught. Then enforce the balk.
(b) If a batted ball follows the balk and results in a ground-out on a previous runner at the
base to which he would be entitled because of the balk, call "Time" the moment the out is
made. Then enforce the balk.
(3) If the balk is followed by a pitch that is caught by the catcher, call "Time" the moment the
catcher catches the ball. Then enforce the balk. (Note exception in ball four situations
covered in item (5) below.)
(4) If the balk is followed by a pick-off throw to a base that is caught by a fielder, call "Time"
the moment the fielder catches the ball. Then enforce the balk.
(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.
(6) If the balk is followed by a pitch that strikes the batter, call "Time" the moment the pitch
strikes the batter. Then enforce the balk unless the hit batter forces all other runners to
advance one base, in which case play proceeds without reference to the balk.
(7) If the balk is followed by a wild throw to a base, the Approved Ruling of Official Baseball
Rule 8.05 provides that the runner may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his
own risk. In that situation the umpire shall call the balk in the usual manner but shall not call
"Time" until all play has ceased (runners have stopped trying to advance and a fielder is in
possession of the ball in the infield).
(8) If the balk is followed by a wild pitch, the Approved Ruling of Official Baseball Rule 8.05
provides that the runner may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk.
In that situation, the umpire shall call the balk in the usual manner but shall not call "Time"
until all play has ceased (runners have stopped trying to advance and an fielder is in
possession of the ball in the infield).
Note that even if the runner advances to or beyond the base to which he is entitled because of
a wild pitch following a balk, the balk is still "acknowledged." That is, the pitch is nullified
and the batter will resume the at-bat with the count that existed when the balk occurred
unless:
(a) The wild pitch was ball four on which all runners advanced one base; or
(b) The wild pitch was strike three on which the batter and all other runners advanced one
base.
In both situations (a) and (b) above, play proceeds without reference to the balk, because all
runners (including the batter-runner) advanced one base on the pitch following the balk."

 

 

[Velho]

Can I get help exploring 7 & 8?

Scenario A: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 advances safely to home & R1 stays at 1B; play relaxes; "Time". 

Do we have R2 scoring, R1 awarded 2B, BR still up with 2-0 count?

Scenario B: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 out at home; R1 advances to 2B; play relaxes; "Time". 

Do we have R2 out, R1 stays at 2B, BR still up with 2-0 count?

[noumpere]

18 minutes ago, Velho said:

Can I get help exploring 7 & 8?

Scenario A: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 advances safely to home & R1 stays at 1B; play relaxes; "Time". 

Do we have R2 scoring, R1 awarded 2B, BR still up with 2-0 count?

Scenario B: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 out at home; R1 advances to 2B; play relaxes; "Time". 

Do we have R2 out, R1 stays at 2B, BR still up with 2-0 count?

A.  Enforce the balk - not all runners advanced.  Now R2, R3.  Same count

B.  Play stands -- all runners advanced. Same count

[Richvee]

2 hours ago, Velho said:

Can I get help exploring 7 & 8?

Scenario A: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 advances safely to home & R1 stays at 1B; play relaxes; "Time". 

Do we have R2 scoring, R1 awarded 2B, BR still up with 2-0 count?

 

 

2 hours ago, noumpere said:

A.  Enforce the balk - not all runners advanced.  Now R2, R3.  Same count

 

So you're saying we would return the runner who scored to 3B because R1 didn't run? 

Granted it's an oddball situation, but the rule doesn't really specify what happens if one runner goes beyond the one base, and another doesn't move. 

 

 

[noumpere]

7 hours ago, Richvee said:

 

So you're saying we would return the runner who scored to 3B because R1 didn't run? 

Granted it's an oddball situation, but the rule doesn't really specify what happens if one runner goes beyond the one base, and another doesn't move. 

 

 

I think it pretty clearly says something like  "ignore the balk if ALL RUNNERS advance" ; since all runners did not advance ...

[Richvee]

4 hours ago, noumpere said:

I think it pretty clearly says something like  "ignore the balk if ALL RUNNERS advance" ; since all runners did not advance ...

Case 7 and 8 doesn't mention multiple runners though.  So the "dumb R1" could hurt or help the team depending on the call at home on R2. Because R2 is going back to third anyway because R1 didn't run on the wild pitch. 

[MadMax]

Please understand, @LDS, I’m not picking on you; your post inspires a related talking point… 

On 6/4/2024 at 8:13 AM, LDS said:

When calling a balk on a pitcher that doesn't come set, 80% of the time the pitcher delivers the pitch anyway.

When that happens, I know it's a live ball if the batter hits the pitch and the offense gets to choose if it is balk or not  based on the outcome of the play.  If the batter doesn't swing or swings and misses what is the call?

I've heard that it is a ball regardless, I've heard it's only a ball if it's ball four otherwise count remains the same and I've also heard it is nothing, count remains the same.

It is USSSA baseball rules.  Can someone help clarify this for me?

Now do you see why NFHS won’t trust us (umpires) with Balks remaining Live? 

USSSA is OBR-based. USA Baseball (inc.) is NFHS. American Legion? Underwritten by MLB, and OBR-based. 

The majority of these games in this age-swath are played by the same kids, coached by the same coaches (outside of bonafide HS coaches), and officiated by the same variably trained umpires!!! 

[The Man in Blue]

[Jimurray]

On 6/11/2024 at 8:46 PM, MadMax said:

Please understand, @LDS, I’m not picking on you; your post inspires a related talking point… 

Now do you see why NFHS won’t trust us (umpires) with Balks remaining Live? 

USSSA is OBR-based. USA Baseball (inc.) is NFHS. American Legion? Underwritten by MLB, and OBR-based. 

The majority of these games in this age-swath are played by the same kids, coached by the same coaches (outside of bonafide HS coaches), and officiated by the same variably trained umpires!!! 

Pretty sure this is a MiLB game. PU killed a wild pitch balk.

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/RJshQ5qJuUSsdTnS/

[MadMax]

On 7/21/2024 at 10:41 AM, Jimurray said:

Pretty sure this is a MiLB game. PU killed a wild pitch balk.

Okay, so he did… and shouldn’t have. This will be reprimanded / corrected by a supervisor, and he won’t do that again. 🤷🏼‍♂️

Professional umpires aren’t perfect; they’re all equally fallible. 

Two key differences here – in Professional ball, the chances of a Runner – in lieu of a Balk call WP – going 1B to 3B are exceptionally rare. The F2’s are just too good at hastily retrieving a wayward pitch, and throwing out runners. So had the PU not called Time post-pitch, does R1 reach 3B successfully? Chances are low. I’m not pardoning his mistake, merely presenting the “numbers”. 
The second difference revolves around the aftermath of a mistake / erroneous call in NFHS (or any non-college amateur) ball, wherein the umpires have minimal to no corrective oversight, or feedback, for that matter. 

[Jimurray]

9 hours ago, MadMax said:

So had the PU not called Time post-pitch, does R1 reach 3B successfully?  

A lot of players don’t know the rule so R1 was probably stopping at 2B anyway and F2 didn’t even turn to chase the WP. I recall a similar occurrence in MLB with Gerry Lane (sp) as PU. 

[The Man in Blue]

On 6/9/2024 at 8:51 PM, Velho said:

Can I get help exploring 7 & 8?

Scenario A: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 advances safely to home & R1 stays at 1B; play relaxes; "Time". 

Do we have R2 scoring, R1 awarded 2B, BR still up with 2-0 count?

Scenario B: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 out at home; R1 advances to 2B; play relaxes; "Time". 

Do we have R2 out, R1 stays at 2B, BR still up with 2-0 count?

 

On 6/9/2024 at 9:11 PM, noumpere said:

A.  Enforce the balk - not all runners advanced.  Now R2, R3.  Same count

B.  Play stands -- all runners advanced. Same count

 

Why would you allow the out to stand (sit. B) but not the run (sit. A)?  That seems counterintuitive.  In both situations one runner advanced and then kept advancing.  Why are you undoing that that to penalize the offense in both cases (either calling him out or taking away his legally scored run)?

IMO, if you are in a balk-stays-live ruleset, the outcome of the play is the outcome of the play.  If a runner does not advance one base, you advance them.  Any runner who did advance more than one base falls under the play stands.  It does not say the outcome has to be the same for ALL RUNNERS.

[834k3r]

29 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

IMO, if you are in a balk-stays-live ruleset, the outcome of the play is the outcome of the play.  If a runner does not advance one base, you advance them.  Any runner who did advance more than one base falls under the play stands.  It does not say the outcome has to be the same for ALL RUNNERS.

I think I understand what you're saying, but I respectfully disagree. To me the penalty in 6.02(a) pretty clearly says that all runners get are awarded one base if not all advance at least one base: "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." (emphasis added)

Taking that reading to Velho's two scenarios:

• Scenario A:  R1 did not advance, so the penalty wording after "unless" does not apply. After calling time, I'm awarding R1 2B, and I'm awarding R2 3B.
• Scenario B:  R1 and R2 both advanced "at least one base," so we do use the wording after "unless"; by rule the play--and the out--stand.

[The Man in Blue]

13 minutes ago, 834k3r said:

I think I understand what you're saying, but I respectfully disagree. To me the penalty in 6.02(a) pretty clearly says that all runners get are awarded one base if not all advance at least one base: "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." (emphasis added)

Taking that reading to Velho's two scenarios:

• Scenario A:  R1 did not advance, so the penalty wording after "unless" does not apply. After calling time, I'm awarding R1 2B, and I'm awarding R2 3B.
• Scenario B:  R1 and R2 both advanced "at least one base," so we do use the wording after "unless"; by rule the play--and the out--stand.

 

But you aren't awarding R2 third base.  He already legally obtained third base.  You are penalizing him for R1 not advancing by taking his run off the board and moving him back.  

I have no problem with allowing the out to stand in B . . . but you need to apply the same logic in both situations.  Either he can score and he can be called out, or he cannot score and he cannot be called out.  You cannot mix and match.

Since the play stays live, IMO, whatever runner did after advancing past one base stands.  Any runner who did not advance gets a one base advance.

Again, nothing in the rule or the penalty/award says it has to be the same application/outcome for both runners.  It just asks "Did the runner advance at least one base?  If yes, leave them alone.  If no, advance them one base."  You need to consider them individually, not in tandem.

I know the answer is "the rule says ignore it" but try this exercise: IF R1 did advance to second base and R2 scored from second base, are you sending R2 back to third since R1 only achieved one base?  NO, of course not.  So why are you considering them in tandem when applying the balk?

[834k3r]

1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

But you aren't awarding R2 third base.  He already legally obtained third base.  You are penalizing him for R1 not advancing by taking his run off the board and moving him back.  

I have no problem with allowing the out to stand in B . . . but you need to apply the same logic in both situations.  Either he can score and he can be called out, or he cannot score and he cannot be called out.  You cannot mix and match.

Since the play stays live, IMO, whatever runner did after advancing past one base stands.  Any runner who did not advance gets a one base advance.

Again, nothing in the rule or the penalty/award says it has to be the same application/outcome for both runners.  It just asks "Did the runner advance at least one base?  If yes, leave them alone.  If no, advance them one base."  You need to consider them individually, not in tandem.

I know the answer is "the rule says ignore it" but try this exercise: IF R1 did advance to second base and R2 scored from second base, are you sending R2 back to third since R1 only achieved one base?  NO, of course not.  So why are you considering them in tandem when applying the balk?

I get what you're saying, and your first paragraph is how the offense will see it if this happens in a game. But to me the penalty pretty clearly says if a/any runner doesn't advance to the next base or beyond, then we adjudicate the balk. Step 1 of that is taking the runners as they were at TOP, is it not? Even if the award is from TOI, no runner has advanced a base. Step 2 is then awarding them one base.

The adjudication sucks for the offense, sure; but it's indeed how I read the rule and penalty.

[The Man in Blue]

Well, let's get the actual wording out . . . (I think this is going to complicate things more) . . . 

 

By the wording, the batter also needs to reach base for us to revert to ignore the balk.  HOWEVER, the first APPROVED RULING is contrary to that happening and allows runners to advance further and/or be put out.

 

 

I'm hanging on that "Approved Ruling" that seems to give us the balk and the result of any play, despite the batter not advancing. 

You are seeing it as all or none, I am seeing it as individually adjudicated.  

[834k3r]

1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

Well, let's get the actual wording out . . . (I think this is going to complicate things more) . . . 

 

By the wording, the batter also needs to reach base for us to revert to ignore the balk.  HOWEVER, the first APPROVED RULING is contrary to that happening and allows runners to advance further and/or be put out.

I'm hanging on that "Approved Ruling" that seems to give us the balk and the result of any play, despite the batter not advancing. 

You are seeing it as all or none, I am seeing it as individually adjudicated.  

I don't think the first Approved Ruling contradicts my post. The AR says "beyond the base to which he was entitled." In scenario A, R1 didn't advance at all, so the penalty is levied as written because not all runners advanced 1 base. In scenario B, both runners did advance at least 1 base, so the penalty is not levied by rule.

[Velho]

18 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

I'm hanging on that "Approved Ruling" that seems to give us the balk and the result of any play, despite the batter not advancing. 

Image didn't come through but I'm guessing it's this

That's when the balk is "acknowledged" because runners have already advanced (so no action required) but the pitch doesn't count against the batter ball-strike count.

 

Looking at MiLB and MLB Manuals, this case play isn't directly addressed, BUT they use bold and italics around "all runners advance" 

MLB Manual:

[The Man in Blue]

19 hours ago, 834k3r said:

I don't think the first Approved Ruling contradicts my post. The AR says "beyond the base to which he was entitled." In scenario A, R1 didn't advance at all, so the penalty is levied as written because not all runners advanced 1 base. In scenario B, both runners did advance at least 1 base, so the penalty is not levied by rule.

Actually, in both scenarios the balk would be enforced because the BATTER/BATTER RUNNER did not make it to first base.  The "ignore" clause includes the batter.

The whole thing is contradictory.  I was saying the Approved Ruling contradicts the "ignore clause" because of that.  The only time you can throw a wild pitch and have the batter advance would be on ball four.  You cannot throw to a base and have the batter runner advance.

I imagine it is supposed to be a second "ignore clause" but they don't have it written that way.

 

11 hours ago, Velho said:

Image didn't come through but I'm guessing it's this

That's when the balk is "acknowledged" because runners have already advanced (so no action required) but the pitch doesn't count against the batter ball-strike count.

 

Looking at MiLB and MLB Manuals, this case play isn't directly addressed, BUT they use bold and italics around "all runners advance" 

MLB Manual:

 

Weird, it shows for me, but yes, that's it.  

The logic in that is makes sense, but it doesn't address our issue.  Do we allow the runner who did advance more than one to stay live (as the rule seemingly allows) and only award those who did not?  Or is it an all or nothing provision?

I don't know where I land on this, so I am not arguing one way or the other.  My point of contention is if you let the out stand, you have to let the run stand on the other side, OR you negate both of them either way.  You cannot let the out stand and then say "but I would take away the run."

[Velho]

1 minute ago, The Man in Blue said:

Actually, in both scenarios the balk would be enforced because the BATTER/BATTER RUNNER did not make it to first base.  The "ignore" clause includes the batter.

Any balk pitch/throw caught, the ball is dead. These are special cases where the ball is uncaught (language below to ensure alignment, again from MLBUM):

I take that to mean that:

Scenario 1: Balk, wild pitch/wild pickoff throw, R1 advances to 2B --> No awards needed since R2 advanced. No change in count to batter.

Scenario 2: Balk, wild pitch/wild pickoff throw, R1 advances to 2B, tagged out trying for 3B. R1 out stands. No change in count to batter.

 

8 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

The logic in that is makes sense, but it doesn't address our issue.  Do we allow the runner who did advance more than one to stay live (as the rule seemingly allows) and only award those who did not?  Or is it an all or nothing provision?

I think we have to infer all is ALL based on the rules and interps taken as a whole.

Not arguing your logic but I think awarding piecemeal is a larger stretch of the ambiguity.

It'd be the same as if scenario: R3, R2, balk, pitch is hit, BR to 1B, R3 scores and R2 stayed at 2B.

That one the rules are explicit. Enforce the balk, R3 scores, R2 to 3B, batter still up. You can't award R2 3B and let BR stay at 1B.

 

I don't see the scenarios I asked about* as inconsistent. It definitely opens up room for a smart R1 to only advance to 2B after seeing if R2 is out or safe at home but it is what it is (we could stick him at 2B if he touched it or got close and safely retreated to 1B I suppose - enforce the travesty clause?)

 

* Restating with "all runners must advance to ignore the balk" outcome for easy of reading the thread:

Scenario A: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 advances safely to home & R1 stays at 1B; play relaxes; "Time".  --> Play didn't meet "all runners advance" exception. R2 to 3B, R1 to 2B, 2-0 count on batter 

Scenario B: R2, R1; 2-0 count; "That's a balk"; wild pitch or wild pickoff; R2 out at home; R1 advances to 2B; play relaxes; "Time". --> Play stands as is. All runners advanced 1 base and R2 was at risk beyond 3B.