Umpire's Nightmare (v. 2.0.1)

[Rich Ives]

Between the gazillion posts on eTeamz and here I've come to the conclusion that I don't have a clue so if it happens in one of my games I'll just sit in the dugout and go along with whatever y'all rule. Well, maybe not, but . .

BTW: Hayes Davis posted this JEA excerpt on eTeamz this morning.

JEA:

R1 and R3, 1-1 count on the batter and 1 out. The pitcher balks but pitches through. The catcher interferes with the batter's swing, but the batter hits the ball anyway and flies out. R3 tags and scores and R1 tags and advances to 2B on the throw home.

RULING: The catcher's interference situation must be coletely resolved before consideration of the balk situation. On this play, the offensive manager would have the option of having the play stand as it occurred (that is, a run in, a runner on 2B with two outs), or have the penalty for catcher's interference enforced (that is, award the batter lB, which would load the bases with still only one out but no runs in).

However, neither of these results satisfies the balk contingency, that is, that each runner, including the BR, must advance at least one base in order for the balk to be ignored. The batter must be included in your thinking on this play since he did something to become a BR. In the first option, the BR did not advance at least one base; in the second option, R3 did not advance at least one base. Therefore, the balk would have to be enforced: R3 would score; R1 would be awarded 2B; and the batter would be brought back to bat with still a 1-1 count and 1 out.