Catcher's Balk ?
 

I have my trusty 2006 BRD and my Sporting News 2006 rule book with me here and I know I'm missing the answer to this question!
When may the catcher leave the catchers box to receive a throw when a runner is attempting to steal home?

PABlue,

Anytime he feels like it. See BRD #285 - Note 297-285 at the end.

JM

Edited to add: Also see SD Steve's JEA cite in post #5 on the "Catcher's Balk" thread earlier today:

http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=27276

The shame ...............................
 

Ten lashes with the wet noodle for you !!!:D :D :D



Doug

Coach JM - I'm letting the rule book trump the comments on this one. If the catcher jumps WAY out of the box before a pitch to nail R3 stealing home I AM calling catcher's balk. There are some rules we don't particularly care about, this being one. But I'm not letting the "gee, catcher had a toe outside his box on a pitchout should we balk him" attitude of "of course not!" let catcher get away with a blatant disregard of the rules to gain this kind of an advantage.

As long as the catcher does not interfere with the batter, he can step out of his box as soon as the pitcher starts his delivery. This is not just a comment, but a pro interp, which means for use in all OBR based games. A catcher's balk simply is not called anymore unless the catcher jumps out before the pitcher starts his motion, for reasons that have already been made clear in JEA and the BRD.

Steve -
I see where you're coming from. But can a pitcher with only R2 throw to third because he THINKS R2 might steal? Nope. So how is home different? If the catcher's out of his box then it's not a "pitch". But like I said, I'm only calling it if the catcher is WAY bending the rule for an unfair advantage.

Here's a thought. In order for a catcher to effectively jump out of the box to nail R3 he would have to do it with a left handed batter in the box, otherwise there's little doubt but that he would interfere with the batter. Considering this, I would say the likelyhood of a catcher jumping out to cut down R3 and not taking the pitch away from the batter is very remote.


Tim.

Well, the pitcher can throw if R2 starts for 3rd, draws the throw, then goes back to 2nd. Same thing on a steal of home. R3 runs down the line as the pitcher starts his windup, for all intents and purposes he is considered stealing. If he goes back, no harm no foul. The catcher is already prohibited from interfering with the batter, so I see no big advantage gained in leaving the box early to catch a pitchout when a runner is coming down the line on him.

EXCEPT that nowhere in my example did I have R2 even take a step to third.

If I'm reading everything right then if the pitcher is just making a normal pitch the catcher can move from the catchers box as soon as the pitcher starts any part of his motion.MAN that noodle hurts!!!ROFL

No, you didn't mention either way, which is incomplete information.

60 lashes with PA's wet noodle!!!:D

Actually, Steve, I DID - i had the pitcher THINKING R2 was stealing. If R2 was on the move he would'nt be "thinking" it - he'd be SEEING it.
Go back to playing with your noodle.

LakeErieUmp,

I'm pretty much a "rules guy" myself - in the sense that I believe the rules of the game should be properly enforced. However, I can't for the life of me think which rule you might be referring to.

Perhaps it's:

If one were to read this rule, it is clear that:

1. In order for the ball to be put "in play", the catcher must be "directly back of the plate". Althought the rule doesn't actually say this, I would stipulate that this means he must be in the "catcher's box".

2. When the defense is intentionally walking the batter, the catcher is constrained to the catcher's box. I believe he is constrained (despite the wording of the rule) until the pitcher initiates his delivery. I would agree that this is NOT what the rule says, but I believe this IS how the rule is properly enforced. But that's not really the question at hand.

3. If the defense is NOT intentionally walking the batter, I believe that the catcher may "...leave his position at any time to catch a pitch or make a play.... I believe this because that IS what the rule says, the JEA case play makes it perfectly clear that it is legal, and there is NO rule (or interpretation) that says otherwise.

If you were to call a balk because the catcher left the box to catch a "pitch out" - whether he did it before the pitcher initiated his delivery, after the pitcher intiated his delivery, or after the ball had left the pitcher's hand - you would be wrong. You would be "making up a rule" - which, as we all know, is a prerogative reserved for coaches.

What have you got that says otherwise? I'm all ears.

JM

JM - I like your sense of humor, that creating rules is the province of coaches!
I find it in 4.03 - a catcher may leave the box to CATCH A PITCH or MAKE A PLAY. This language suggests a catcher can leave the box to catch a pitch OUTSIDE THE BOX. or make a play in which he has to LEAVE THE BOX. And I back that up with the mandatory language of 4.03 that the catcher SHALL be behind the plate, UNTIL he has to catch a pitch. As in, only in the even he has to leave to catch the pitch can he move out.

And a PITCH is not delivered until the pitcher engages. And makes a definitive movement toward the plate. Which means the catcher is glued to the box until such movement- which is maybe a split-second until the ball leaves the pitcher's hand. Thus precluding the catcher from setting up outside the box. As I suggested.

LakeErieUmp,

Glad to see you took my comments in the spirit intended. I was, of course referencing:

That one I made up.

However, I did not make up either of the following. First, from JEA (my emphasis):

Additionally, from the BRD we have:

I find absolutely NO SUPPORT for your assertion that "...the catcher SHALL be behind the plate, UNTIL he has to catch a pitch. ...". The rule certainly doesn't say that. The authoritative opinions don't say that.

The ONLY times a catcher can "create" a balk are:

1. During an intentional walk.

2. During a steal of home or squeeze play by interfering with the batter's opportunity to hit the pitch.

So, again, I say if you call a balk because the catcher "left the box" in ANY other circumstance, you are just plain wrong. There is NO support for such a call in either the rules or ANY recognized interpretation.

JM

LakeErie-

I think you're misunderstanding 4.03(a). I read it as follows:

4.03 When the ball is put in play at the start of, or during a game, all fielders other than the catcher shall be on fair territory.
(a) The catcher shall station himself directly back of the plate.

So this is saying that I can't put the ball in play unless the catcher is directly behind the plate.

He may leave his position at any time to catch a pitch or make a play except that when the batter is being given an intentional base on balls, the catcher must stand with both feet within the lines of the catcher’s box until the ball leaves the pitcher’s hand.

In this sentence, the only time the catcher is restricted to having both feet in the catchers box is during an intentional base on balls.

This is how this rule was explained to me. Whaddaya think?

Beating upon the dead horse, 4.03 has to be read in combination with which defines what a pitch is. If the catcher has to be behind the plate UNTIL the pitch, then he cannot leave UNTIL a pitch, which is defined by 2.00 as a ball delivered to a batter, and 8.01 etc. which defines a pitch as a ball delivered appropriately to a batter.
Again, I'm not picking nits. I have no problem with a catcher jumping out to snare a pitch up the third base line to nail a stealing R3. I just do NOT see where a catcher can SET UP out of the box BEFORE a pitch.

The catcher commits this balk and the balk is charged to the pitcher. That's why it's been known as a "catchers balk" for as long as I can remember.


Tim.

Once again, from JEA:

The umpire should not allow play to commence unless the catcher positions himself directly back of home plate. He may leave this position in compliance with Rule 4.03(a).

And from good old Rule 2.00:

The CATCHER'S BOX is that area within which the catcher shall stand until the pitcher delivers the ball. (remember the proper interp of delivering the ball, don't take it literally)

Put that with JM's and ctblu40's explanations, and that is the way to rule on it.

<a href="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb008_ZRYYYYYYYYUS" target="_blank"><img src="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/29/29_4_21.gif" alt="Music Note" border="0"></a> So ya had a bad day......<a href="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb008_ZRYYYYYYYYUS" target="_blank"><img src="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/29/29_4_21.gif" alt="Music Note" border="0"></a>

LakeErieUmp,

Where are you getting this "...If the catcher has to be behind the plate UNTIL the pitch, then he cannot leave UNTIL a pitch,..." business?

I can't find ANYTHING that says this (with the exception of an IBB) anywhere - not in the text of the rules, not in JEA, not in J/R, not in the BRD, and not in the MLBUM.

Perhaps you have a misconception on this point.

JM

Would that be our new American "Idle?"

he-he


Tim.

I like the hide your head in shame and slither back under a rock idea. Feeling guilty for posting bad info again?


Tim.

PWL,

You remove posts where you've messed up all the freakin time, so don't go there.

I did not hide for two days. I was off the computer for one day because I was not home and had no access to a computer. Not that I should have to answer to you for my whereabouts. You sure do pay way too much attention to what I do. Why don't you just stick to getting rule interpretations wrong, and leave my personal business alone.

And I'll post my beliefs any old time I want to, because I'm certainly not ashamed of them. I would have deleted the whole thread, but I wanted certain links to remain up in case one wanted to peruse them.

When I came back, the following day, what was I supposed to do, issue an apology? I don't think so. I responded the way I did and I'll respond the same the next time someone opens up that can of worms. You need to start minding your own business, but I don't think you're capable of doing so.

And don't end with smiley faces when your posts are not in the least bit intended to be humorous. All they are is pathetically sad.

Edited to add: I'm leaving this post up, even though PWL has deleted his posts which led to this one.

OK, looking at it from a slightly different perspective, granting you your interpretation of the catcher's illegal act - where do you see in the rules that the penalty for what you think the catcher can't do is a balk?