Quote:
Originally posted by chuckfan1
I had a play where the offensive coach wanted a catchers balk. Now I know that it didnt happen on the play in question, but was wondering if anyone out there has ever called it and why. And if not, I guess it would have to be really blatant, so under what circumstance would you call it?...[snip]...
|
The so-called catcher's balk to which you refer is actually a special case of catcher's interference under OBR 7.07 for which the penalty is a balk charged to the pitcher. There is an argument that OBR 6.08(c) was intended to supercede OBR 7.07, and that the latter rule should have been deleted as a result. The only difference in penalty evidently applies to a runner on 2nd base who is neither stealing nor forced to advance on the play.
I have never used OBR 7.07 myself, but I think I have seen it used to great effect during a District League 1st Div Grand Final. The catcher saw R3 attempting to steal home on the pitch. F2 stepped out in front of the plate to glove the pitch in time to tag the stealing runner, and so deprived the batter of an opportunity to offer at the pitch. The umpire in question made a great call, considering he had probably NEVER BEFORE seen the circumstances in
his officiating life either, to kill the play and advance all runners including the stealing R3 before awarding the batter to 1st base.
I don't remember if R2 was either forced or stealing on that play, so I can't tell you whether my colleague's justification came from OBR 7.07 or OBR 6.08(c). It was only afterward that I checked to see why he'd made the awards that way. All I could do was to hope that someday I would have the presence of mind to make such a decisive call in such an obscure situation during such an important and stressful event. It was a legendary call, just like the umpire who made it. Unfortunately he was killed in a mining accident - aged 36 years - so we'll never know just how great an umpire he might have become.
Bottom line: Any time the catcher interferes to deprive a batter of an opportunity to offer at the pitch in those circumstances I would make that call. OTOH, I don't know whether I would choose to apply OBR 7.07 for the expressed purpose of having a non-forced, non-stealing R2 awarded a base as part of the penalty. The cost of rewarding that immobile "runner" is for a balk to be charged against a pitcher who may have done absolutely nothing wrong. I'm not sure that's a fair trade. If those who say that OBR 6.08(c) was intended to supercede OBR 7.07 are correct, then the rule makers must clearly have agreed because they specifically included the case in their interpretive Casebook Comment for OBR 6.08(c).
Hope this helps
Cheers