I saw this question and answer on Ask the ump, Am I crazy or is this at best a really poor description of the rule in question and at worst just plain wrong?
__________________________________________________ _________
I'm an old catcher (78 years of age). Many years ago I was called for committing a "Catcher's Balk." I happened to move to the right of the plate just before the delivery of the pitch. Is this still in the rule book?
-- Al Arellano

McClelland: It is a balk if the catcher doesn't stay in the catcher's box until the pitcher delivers the ball. If he were to step out of the catcher's box – the little box behind home plate – before the pitcher delivers the ball it would be called a catcher's balk. The runners would advance.

As a matter of fact, I have never seen it called, it's one of those things you just kind of let slide. But it is in the rule book, we haven't updated the rule book in a long time. If it was called recently, it would be by an umpire taking the rule book to the letter of the law and sometimes we have to kind of overlook some things to make the game run smoother.
__________________________________________________ ________

If i'm not mistaken, is the "Catcher's Balk" only applied to intentional walks, and obviously is still enforced, as you see the catchers, stand and point, then jump out after the ball is thrown, rather than step-out and just have the ball thown to them.

Off the top of my head, the catcher must stay in the box until the ball is released by the pitcher (OBR). It may also be applicable on a pitch out.

It may be one of those things they let slide in the Pro's however, when the other team is screaming about it, it's tough to say were not calling that rule today. Had this come up once, in twenty years.

Usually I speak to the catcher and tell him to stay in the box until the pitcher releases the ball, it saves problems.

can you post where that is.
 

All I can find is 8.05 If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when_ ... (l) The pitcher, while giving an intentional base on balls, pitches when the catcher is not in the catcher's box;

I believe the proper interpretation is that, on an intentional walk, the catcher must be in the catcher's box <b>when the pitcher <i>initiates</i> his delivery</b> - i.e., at the Time Of Pitch (TOP).

If not during an intentional walk, the catcher is not confined to the box. Watch any MLB game and you will regularly see catcher's setup for an outside pitch with one foot well outside the catcher's box. Also, on a pitch out the catcher is free to setup outside the confines of the catcher's box or jump out of the box early.

JM

I have never called it, and never seen it called. It could be one of those highly technical balks that does not fool any runners, and thus why does it exist?

I'm also a catcher and I was called for a catchers balkabout 1 1/2 years ago playing Babe Ruth 16-19 year old baseball. This particular umpire was notorious for being strict so I got tossed for telling him that he was full of it. I also saw it called in a Braves-Cardinals game two years ago. Javy Lopez's foot was on the line of the catcher's box and he was called for a catcher's balk. Bobby Cox came out and argued and managed to stay in the game. Later in the game, Lopez got called again and he and Bobby got early showers. I still don't understand the rule...

i think that was back when the braves started making the catchers box bigger than the book says to make it. they got called on it by the other team and wanted to re-chalk it before the game (or during the game, cant remember).

edited: my post refers to a situation in 2000, not 2 years ago, <a href="http://forums.mlbcenter.com/showthread.php?t=6805">article here</a>

[Edited by briancurtin on Jul 24th, 2005 at 12:46 PM]

I think youre right
I do remember the braves-cardinals this happening too

When a catcher steps in front of homeplate and cuts off the pitch before it reaches the batter in order to stop R3 from stealing home, isn't he also commiting a catchers balk?

Tim.

It all depends on whether you beleive 7.07 is still a "valid" rule. Some say it's superceded by 6.08(c) CMT.

Of course, the difference between the two rules only comes into play when there's R2 and R3, and R3 is the only one attempting an advance.

7.07 would seem to be valid as it's covered in the MLBUM


From MLBUM 6.12 (Last two paragraphs):

<i>If a runner is attempting to steal a base when the catcher interferes with the batter, the runner is awarded the base on the interference. Runners not attempting to steal or not forced to advance remain on the base they occupied at the time of the interference unless Official Baseball Rule 7.07 applies. Under Official Baseball Rule 7.07, if a runner is stealing home when the catcher interferes with the batter, the additional penalty of a balk is invoked, which enables all runners on base to advance (whether or not they were stealing). See item (p) in Section 7.5.

See also Official Baseball Rules 6.08(c), 7.04(d), and 7.07.</i>


The referenced 7.5 item:

<i>(p) Under Official Baseball Rule 7.07, if a runner is stealing home when the catcher interferes with the batter, an additional penalty of a balk is invoked which enables all runners on base to advance (whether or not they were stealing). See Section 6.12.</i>