Balk and a Wild Pitch

[HumblePie]

OBR   R1   No outs.  2-0 count.

Pitcher balks by failing to stop, PU calls it, then pitcher delivers the pitch.  Pitch is wild, kicks away from the catcher, and R1 advances safely all the way to 3B.

Defensive Head Coach comes out and argues that the balk needs to be enforced, the ball was dead, and that R1 must return to 2B, all on the basis that the batter did not become a runner and reach 1B.  He further argues that a wild pitch is not the same as throwing wildly to a base (including home plate).

Please use the OBR rulebook and/or other interp manuals to officiate this play properly.

For 25 years, I've considered a wild pitch in this scenario to end the action on the basis that the Batter cannot reach 1B.

However, I'm now confused by wording in the MLBUM.

[SH0102]

3 hours ago, HumblePie said:

OBR   R1   No outs.  2-0 count.

Pitcher balks by failing to stop, PU calls it, then pitcher delivers the pitch.  Pitch is wild, kicks away from the catcher, and R1 advances safely all the way to 3B.

Defensive Head Coach comes out and argues that the balk needs to be enforced, the ball was dead, and that R1 must return to 2B, all on the basis that the batter did not become a runner and reach 1B.  He further argues that a wild pitch is not the same as throwing wildly to a base (including home plate).

Please use the OBR rulebook and/or other interp manuals to officiate this play properly.

For 25 years, I've considered a wild pitch in this scenario to end the action on the basis that the Batter cannot reach 1B.

However, I'm now confused by wording in the MLBUM.

Two things are true; the play is live and the balk will either be acknowledged (enforced for batter) or not.

Since the batter did not advance, the pitch is nullified, as the requirements to “ignore” the balk were not met.

However, balks are live and runners are entitled to try and advance beyond the base they are entitled to, but do so at their own risk (if thrown out, out stands)

If the wild pitch had been ball 4 or u3k and batter reaches first and runner took off, pitch would count bc the requirements to “ignore” the balk were met

[johnnyg08]

7 hours ago, HumblePie said:

OBR   R1   No outs.  2-0 count.

Pitcher balks by failing to stop, PU calls it, then pitcher delivers the pitch.  Pitch is wild, kicks away from the catcher, and R1 advances safely all the way to 3B.

Defensive Head Coach comes out and argues that the balk needs to be enforced, the ball was dead, and that R1 must return to 2B, all on the basis that the batter did not become a runner and reach 1B.  He further argues that a wild pitch is not the same as throwing wildly to a base (including home plate).

Please use the OBR rulebook and/or other interp manuals to officiate this play properly.

For 25 years, I've considered a wild pitch in this scenario to end the action on the basis that the Batter cannot reach 1B.

However, I'm now confused by wording in the MLBUM.

So...we enforce the balk. No pitch. Keep R2 at 2b. Count remains 2-0. 

Yes?

[jimurrayalterego]

7 hours ago, HumblePie said:

OBR   R1   No outs.  2-0 count.

Pitcher balks by failing to stop, PU calls it, then pitcher delivers the pitch.  Pitch is wild, kicks away from the catcher, and R1 advances safely all the way to 3B.

Defensive Head Coach comes out and argues that the balk needs to be enforced, the ball was dead, and that R1 must return to 2B, all on the basis that the batter did not become a runner and reach 1B.  He further argues that a wild pitch is not the same as throwing wildly to a base (including home plate).

Please use the OBR rulebook and/or other interp manuals to officiate this play properly.

For 25 years, I've considered a wild pitch in this scenario to end the action on the basis that the Batter cannot reach 1B.

However, I'm now confused by wording in the MLBUM.

 

7 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

So...we enforce the balk. No pitch. Keep R2 at 2b. Count remains 2-0. 

Yes?

No, R1 stays at 3B and the balk is acknowledged for the batter. The approved ruling includes wild pitches and pickoffs, requiring you to leave the ball alive allowing the runner to advance at his own risk.

"APPROVED RULING: In cases where a pitcher balks and throws wild, either to a base or to home plate, a runner or runners may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk."

[johnnyg08]

11 minutes ago, jimurrayalterego said:

 

No, R1 stays at 3B and the balk is acknowledged for the batter. The approved ruling includes wild pitches and pickoffs, requiring you to leave the ball alive allowing the runner to advance at his own risk.

"APPROVED RULING: In cases where a pitcher balks and throws wild, either to a base or to home plate, a runner or runners may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk."

Okay...that makes more sense. Thanks. 

[Velho]

Thanks @HumblePie. I had same almost there but not 100% based on MLBUM as well. A small language add would remove any ambiguity, such as

"APPROVED RULING: In cases where a pitcher balks and throws wild, either to a base or to home plate, a runner or runners may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk and remain out or safe while  "acknowledging" the balk with the count remaining the same for the batter"

[Richvee]

1 hour ago, Velho said:

while  "acknowledging" the balk with the count remaining the same for the batter"

That's a little redundant. Acknowledging the balk literally means the count stays the same  

[Velho]

6 minutes ago, Richvee said:

1 hour ago, Velho said:

while  "acknowledging" the balk with the count remaining the same for the batter"

That's a little redundant. Acknowledging the balk literally means the count stays the same  

Ah yes BUT that's not the only thing that happens in acknowledging (i.e. enforcing) the balk penalty 99% of the time (that 99% being where runners don't advance past their awarded base). We kill it and award the bases.

I think that's where the confusion comes from. The frame that gets in people's head is binary A) let the play stand in it's entirety (pitch included) or B) No pitch and award +1 base to all runners.

I'm simply calling out that this half pregnant outcome of "let the play stand on runners that advanced past what would have been their award but there was no pitch" could be more clearly covered. I understand it may be clear as day in the language to some but for myself and others* there is a needed logical leap to differentiate "acknowledging" from enforcing and we'd benefit from more explicit language.

* And they aren't dumb or generally ignorant folks

[HumblePie]

Here's where all my confusion comes from, as well as many of my colleagues ...

"APPROVED RULING: In cases where a pitcher balks and throws wild, either to a base or to home plate, a runner or runners may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk."

This says THROWS wild either to a base or to home plate.  That tells me it's not referring to a pitch (wild pitch) but only a throw to home, such as when R3 steals home, the pitcher disengages, and throws home.

Only the language in the MLBUM uses the actual phrase wild pitch.

[Replacematt]

14 minutes ago, HumblePie said:

Here's where all my confusion comes from, as well as many of my colleagues ...

"APPROVED RULING: In cases where a pitcher balks and throws wild, either to a base or to home plate, a runner or runners may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk."

This says THROWS wild either to a base or to home plate.  That tells me it's not referring to a pitch (wild pitch) but only a throw to home, such as when R3 steals home, the pitcher disengages, and throws home.

Only the language in the MLBUM uses the actual phrase wild pitch.

I'm racking my brain, and I cannot come up with a situation where a pitcher could throw (not pitch) to home and balk in a manner where the ball would remain live. 

[Kevin_K]

3 minutes ago, Replacematt said:

I'm racking my brain, and I cannot come up with a situation where a pitcher could throw (not pitch) to home and balk in a manner where the ball would remain live. 

R1 and R3. Runners break on first movement by the pitcher. When runners take off the pitcher balks because he stops his motion. He then steps off the rubber and throws home in an attempt to retire R3 and throws the ball wild, allowing R1 to advance all the way to 3B. 

Is that possible? (a question, not being snarky)

[HumblePie]

7 minutes ago, Replacematt said:

I'm racking my brain, and I cannot come up with a situation where a pitcher could throw (not pitch) to home and balk in a manner where the ball would remain live. 

Agreed ... point taken ... and yet, using the term "wild pitch" would make things so easy.  So clear.

[HumblePie]

1 minute ago, Kevin_K said:

R1 and R3. Runners break on first movement by the pitcher. When runners take off the pitcher balks because he stops his motion. He then steps off the rubber and throws home in an attempt to retire R3 and throws the ball wild, allowing R1 to advance all the way to 3B. 

Is that possible? (a question, not being snarky)

I think, as Replacematt said, I'd kill it and call the balk as soon as he stopped his motion.

[lawump]

24 minutes ago, HumblePie said:

Here's where all my confusion comes from, as well as many of my colleagues ...

"APPROVED RULING: In cases where a pitcher balks and throws wild, either to a base or to home plate, a runner or runners may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk."

This says THROWS wild either to a base or to home plate.  That tells me it's not referring to a pitch (wild pitch) but only a throw to home, such as when R3 steals home, the pitcher disengages, and throws home.

Only the language in the MLBUM uses the actual phrase wild pitch.

In a sense, I feel your pain, HumblePie.  If one learned OBR through the Jaksa/Roder Manual (which I did as that was the textbook at the umpire school I attended), one would be banging their head up against the wall reading this approved ruling.  J/R went to great lengths to differentiate between a pitch and throw...and took great pains to use the correct term each time...and that Manual would never used the language used in the "APPROVED RULING".  (FWIW, J/R also went to great lengths to differentiate between a "catch" and merely "gloving the ball", too.)

However, this is mostly semantics as the full language of the rule and MLBUM make clear how to handle a balk followed by a wild pitch.

[JSam21]

54 minutes ago, Kevin_K said:

R1 and R3. Runners break on first movement by the pitcher. When runners take off the pitcher balks because he stops his motion. He then steps off the rubber and throws home in an attempt to retire R3 and throws the ball wild, allowing R1 to advance all the way to 3B. 

Is that possible? (a question, not being snarky)

This isn't a balk followed immediately by a pitch or throw to a base. This is balk followed by a disengagement. We would call time here and enforce the balk.

 

[Richvee]

55 minutes ago, Kevin_K said:

When runners take off the pitcher balks because he stops his motion.

Right there..is the balk. Kill it

 

55 minutes ago, Kevin_K said:

He then steps off the rubber and throws home in an attempt to retire R3

That never happened. Time was called after the start stop balk. 

[johnnyg08]

On 2/6/2025 at 12:50 PM, Kevin_K said:

R1 and R3. Runners break on first movement by the pitcher. When runners take off the pitcher balks because he stops his motion. He then steps off the rubber and throws home in an attempt to retire R3 and throws the ball wild, allowing R1 to advance all the way to 3B. 

Is that possible? (a question, not being snarky)

Balk. Started and stopped. 

[maven]

On 2/6/2025 at 1:52 PM, HumblePie said:

I think, as Replacematt said, I'd kill it and call the balk as soon as he stopped his motion.

That doesn't always stop F1. It's worth knowing how to handle it for cases where it doesn't stop him. Or when we don't process it fast enough.

In general, I don't like the idea of trying to get around proper enforcement of the live-ball balk by inserting a "time" call where one wouldn't naturally go. If the dead-ball balk is going away, let it go. JMO.

As for pitch/throw: a pitch is one kind of throw (and J/R knows that). A rule that references 'throws' without qualification could reasonably be interpreted as including pitches, especially in this particular context. 

[Replacematt]

6 hours ago, maven said:

That doesn't always stop F1. It's worth knowing how to handle it for cases where it doesn't stop him. Or when we don't process it fast enough.

In general, I don't like the idea of trying to get around proper enforcement of the live-ball balk by inserting a "time" call where one wouldn't naturally go. If the dead-ball balk is going away, let it go. JMO.

As for pitch/throw: a pitch is one kind of throw (and J/R knows that). A rule that references 'throws' without qualification could reasonably be interpreted as including pitches, especially in this particular context. 

We still kill it. Once the stop happened, it was dead, even if we didn't kill it at that time.

Think of it like this--was the balk part of a continuous motion? If so, we leave it live. Was it part of an interruption, or followed by a separate act? Then we kill it at that point.