A little help please...
 

I'm mainly a football and basketball ref, just started doing baseball last year. Usually I just look up answers to things like this in the rule book myself, but I'm in the process of a move and all my books are boxed up.

Anyway, I was working a district 14u tournament yesterday. Between games I overheard an umpire on another field talking to a coach. Evidently in the game they had, a player tried to steal home. The catcher sat back in the catchers box, caught the ball, and tagged the runner. The umpire made a safe call. After the inning was over, the umpire overheard the defensive coach telling his catcher to move forward and reach for the ball, so as to catch it quicker and apply the tag quicker.

After the game while we were upstairs in the office, I overheard the umpire telling the coach that the catcher moving up and doing as he had been instructed would be a "balk on the catcher". He explained that doing so during a pitch from the rubber was an illegal action. He did say that if the pitcher had stepped off the rubber, this was legal.

By no means am I saying I am a baseball rules genius. I primarily officiate basketball and football, so those two sports get most of my rules attention. However, I don't remember ever reading anything about a "balk on the catcher".

Is this just another one of those made up rules that gets passed on from generation to generation (i.e. 'the baserunner always has a right to the basepath')? The umpire in question is one that I respect, but I still don't think he's right.

Here is the rule: 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;

So in this situation, you will not see a balk called on the catcher because the pitcher is not giving an intentional base on balls.

SouthGaRef,

The rule tibear posted has absolutely no relevance to your situation. The rule you are looking for is (OBR) 7.07:

If the catcher can do as his coach suggested and manage NOT to interfere with the batter's opportunity to hit the pitch, he is fine. If he interferes with the batter and/or steps on or in front of the plate without the ball, he's not.

The umpire is correct on the essential point that the penalty includes a balk (the significance being that ALL runners advance, even if they were neither stealing nor forced), though his statement was kind of "technically" incorrect. The pitcher is charged with a balk as a result of the catcher's actions.

JM

A "catcher's balk" (which is called every millennium or so) is when the catcher leaves his box before the pitch is delivered, usually on an intentional walk.

What this coach is telling his catcher to do is a possible interference violation on the catcher.

Ace

Ace, you gotta type faster than JM, who scooped you.

Boy, this may drag up an old debate, but I'm gonna say my piece anyway.

At one time, many professional umpires were told to scratch 7.07 out of their rulebooks. It's an old rule, was the argument, and it has since been superceded by the newer 6.08(c) and 7.04(d).

Likewise, I was told to scratch 7.07 out of my rulebook. I worked high school ball in a non-FED state with a former professional umpire as our Umpire-in-Chief. He used to call it the, "Idiot R2 Rule." The reason, of course, is because the only thing 7.07 can do that 6.08(c) and 7.04(d) cannot is award third to a runner on second who stood there like an idiot while his teammate from third tried to steal home plate.

"In our league," he'd say, "we're not gonna reward the idiot R2. Scratch it out."

That's right: 7.07 is a dud. In addition to rewarding idiot R2, it punishes innocent F1 with a balk for F2's interference. Unjust on 2 counts.

Balk, schmalk -- that's for the scorekeepers and stat-heads to worry about. :D

So...

for those of us (like me) who umpires ball simply based on FED rules, what do I do in this situation?

Maybe hope to God I never see it?!

SouthGARef,

Under FED rules, there is no "special provision" for Catcher's Obstruction with a runner attempting to advance to home.

It is treated just like any other Catcher's Obstruction in FED.

JM

I'm all for using common sense on interps but isn't this a stretch? R3 could have taken off on his own, there is the possibility of a DP F2-F5 on a clean tag, why take into account R2's actions at all?

I believe that in FED it is also a balk if the catcher leaves the catchers box prior to release of pitch in ANY circumstance (not just on the intentional walk). I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong!!

I am a catcher and have been for 12 years and have never heard of a balk on the catcher. The catcher is allowed to move around as much as possible as long as he does not get in the way of the batter attempting to hit a ball. But the catcher must be in the catcher's box unless it is an IBB or a PO. The balk is only allowed to be called on the pitcher when there is a runner on base. It must be a made up rule kind of like "the runner has the right away in the basepath."

Well, since you asked for correction.

FED: Catcher can leave the box at TOP, not after the pitch leaves the pitching hand. FED can IW by verbal also so no need to pitch. Except during an IW the catcher can leave the box for other reasons.

OBR: Catcher leaving the box before the ball leaves the hand is technically a BALK, but major league umpires do not strictly enforce and therefore for all practical purposes it is TOP also. Catcher can leave the box for other reasons before TOP if an IW is not being given.

Steve,

A balk can be called by the actions of a catcher. It is very rare, and is normally not called, as has been stated. The balk is credited to the pitcher, however, so it's not "called" on the catcher. The catcher is supposed to remain in his box until the pitcher has released the ball, but that is not strictly enforced at all.

The runner does have the right of way in the basepath unless the fielder is fielding a batted ball. The fielder must not alter or block the path of a baserunner without possession of the baseball (or imminently receiving a throw).