[UmpJM]

Dave,

I would have to say that you have posed a 9.01(c) situation because there is no rule that explicitly addresses the situation you describe.

Bob Jenkins suggests a 3.15/(Intentional) Interference by an "Authorized Person" ruling, which, in my opinion, is probably the best way to approach it.

Namely, you kill the play ("TIME"!) and rule in a way that would "nullify the act" of (intentional) interference. Based on your description, that would be placing the stealing R1 on 2B - since you said that was where he would have ended up had the On-Deck Batter gotten out of the way of the wild pitch. (I.E. One base award from TOP on a pitch deflected out of play.)

Now technically, 3.15 does not apply because the rule language explicitly excludes "players in uniform" from being covered under 3.15 and refers us to 7.11 for acts by teammates. But 7.11 doesn't really apply either because, as described, the ODB's (in)action did not in any way hinder the F2 from making a play or gaining control of the ball - in fact it probably aided him more than hindered him.

I keep using the word "intentional" because I subscribe to the J/R assertion that if a player "blatantly and avoidably" alters the playing action in a way proscribed by the rules that is sufficient evidence of intent.

I would suggest that the best ruling would be to kill it and place the R1 on 2B.

I think you could also return the R1 to 1B (on the principle of "punishing stupidity whenever possible") and not be subject to reversal on a protest.

You could probably even place the R1 on 3B (and not be subject to reversal), but I personally don't much care for that because it benefits the offense for "not doing what they should".

JM