Brown. Black & Blue, Boners & Balks - The B thread

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by Bocabirdman

I lifted this.....When a balk is made on a pitch that is a 4th ball, it shall be ruled the same as when the batter hits a balk pitch and is safe on a hit or error, provided all runners advance at least one base on the play. Therefore, with a runner on 1st, 1st and 2nd, or 1st, 2nd and 3rd, when a balk is called on the 4th ball, the batter goes to 1st base and all runners advance at least one base. If they attempt to advance more than one base, they do so at their own risk.

I may be wrong but I think in the matter of a balk followed by a pitch and/or ball in play certain events overrule others. If a balk occurs and is followed by a safe hit.. The balk is overlooked and the hit stands.. If followed by an out (say a pop out) the balk stands and any runner advances... If followed by a ball four, the "ball" supersedes the balk and the batter takes first base. I think regardless, the batter is awarded first base on the basis of base on balls, and per your situation the runners are advancing by virtuebone same base on balls that forces them forward a base. A 3 ball count balk in and of its self (without a ball four), like not coming fully set/bending knees, etc would not result in the batter taking first, only in the runners advancing.

Regardless, I don't envy MLB umpires... Even if they did butcher those calls last week.

[itjclarke]

.

[itjclarke]

Adding- regardless I'd think the vast majority (90% +) of balks are called and enforced prior to the pitch, for any (and many more) of the aforementioned infractions. About the only way I could imagine a balk resulting in a live pitch is if the pitcher doesn't come fully set at the waist prior to making his movement toward the plate.. That call would have to be instantaneous to stop the pitch and if the 2nd base umpire rather than the home plate umpire, makes the call, it may allow for a pitch to be thrown.

I'm firing from the hip here (traveling/using phone only) but if anyone with good Google access could clarify further, I'd love to read more. Balks confused me enough when I was playing.

[Bocabirdman]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

I may be wrong but I think in the matter of a balk followed by a pitch and/or ball in play certain events overrule others. If a balk occurs and is followed by a safe hit.. The balk is overlooked and the hit stands.. If followed by an out (say a pop out) the balk stands and any runner advances... If followed by a ball four, the "ball" supersedes the balk and the batter takes first base. I think regardless, the batter is awarded first base on the basis of base on balls, runners on base advance by virtue of the balk. And a 3 ball count balk in and of its self (without a ball four), like not coming fully set/bending knees, etc would not result in the batter taking first.

Regardless, I don't envy MLB umpires... Even if they did butcher those calls last week.

The longer I think about this the more my head hurts. After going to the instant replay booth, I concede a mis-interpretation on my part. Either way the guy gets 1st base....Balk or ball four........

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by Bocabirdman

The longer I think about this the more my head hurts. After going to the instant replay booth., I concede a mis-interpretaion on my part. Either way the guy gets 1st base....Balk or ball four........

I agree, my head and thumbs hurt. It's fun to hate the umps, but those guys have to keep a lot of crap straight, and in front of 50 millionaires, 45,000 fans, and if they're really lucky a several million large postseason viewing audience. lotta pressure on those guys.

[frankbmd]

Balk talk has been in the true spirit of the B thread, but I have another question related to the base umpires.

I thought I knew the rules about fair and foul balls, but during a recent Brewers game, I became confused.

In the infield if a base umpire (1st or 3rd) deems that a ball in the infield passes over first or third base, it is deemed fair regardless of where it lands (?), according to the broadcast and the umpires in the game. Why then is a slicing line drive down the right field line that clearly passes first base in fair territory and then slices foul considered a foul ball. Deep in the corners if the ball lands in foul territory it is foul.

Questions

1. When or where does the over the base rule for the infield stop being applied?

2. or in other words how far beyond the bases does the over or inside the base rule no longer apply?

3. and finally does anyone else remember the kissing Bandit, Morganna? Her Bs qualify for this thread.

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Balk talk has been in the true spirit of the B thread, but I have another question related to the base umpires.

I thought I knew the rules about fair and foul balls, but during a recent Brewers game, I became confused.

In the infield if a base umpire (1st or 3rd) deems that a ball in the infield passes over first or third base, it is deemed fair regardless of where it lands (?), according to the broadcast and the umpires in the game. Why then is a slicing line drive down the right field line that clearly passes first base in fair territory and then slices foul considered a foul ball. Deep in the corners if the ball lands in foul territory it is foul.

Questions

1. When or where does the over the base rule for the infield stop being applied?

2. or in other words how far beyond the bases does the over or inside the base rule no longer apply?

3. and finally does anyone else remember the kissing Bandit, Morganna? Her Bs qualify for this thread.

Ha, the ground ball over the bag!!! I think it's gotta be one of the single most impossible calls to make accurately, and is probably just a fair guess (see also- check swings) most of the time. I think the ground ball is different because it at least established itself in fair play when it hit the ground, thus the difference as to its being ruled fair by simply passing over the bag. The line drive didn't establish itself in fair play at any point, until it hits the ground in the outfield.. hence looking to see if the chalk pops up. I'm not saying this makes sense, but think that's the general thought behind it... it's similar to "ball crossing plain" versus dragging feet in back of endzone while "establishing possession" in football. The runner who only need to cross the plain has already established possession, while the dude catching ball has to establish possession as well as being in bounds.

To your questions 1 and 2... "over or inside the base" no longer applies once a ball on the fly goes further than the bases.. but applies for all balls that land/hit ground prior to the base.

Wasn't her name Topsy Turvey? or was that someone else??

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

Ha, the ground ball over the bag!!! I think it's gotta be one of the single most impossible calls to make accurately, and is probably just a fair guess (see also- check swings) most of the time. I think the ground ball is different because it at least established itself in fair play when it hit the ground, thus the difference as to its being ruled fair by simply passing over the bag. The line drive didn't establish itself in fair play at any point, until it hits the ground in the outfield.. hence looking to see if the chalk pops up. I'm not saying this makes sense, but think that's the general thought behind it... it's similar to "ball crossing plain" versus dragging feet in back of endzone while "establishing possession" in football. The runner who only need to cross the plain has already established possession, while the dude catching ball has to establish possession as well as being in bounds.

Wasn't her name Topsy Turvey? or was that someone else??

The referenced play I believe was a low line drive that was ruled to have passed over third base and thus called fair by the third base umpire. I think the ball landed in foul territory. I could be wrong as I was watching Net54 at the same time.

On another play the "vicinity" rule at second base was taken to the extreme when the thirdbaseman fielded a grounder and flipped the ball to the secondbaseman. The problem however was that the shortstop was on the bag and the secondbaseman was ten feet off the bag. The relay to first was late, but the runner at second was called out. The umpire's call was upheld.

The more I know, the more I don't understand.

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

On another play the "vicinity" rule at second base was taken to the extreme when the thirdbaseman fielded a grounder and flipped the ball to the secondbaseman. The problem however was that the shortstop was on the bag and the secondbaseman was ten feet off the bag. The relay to first was late, but the runner at second was called out. The umpire's call was upheld.

The more I know, the more I don't understand.

Woah man.. that "vicinity" play is going to get blown to pieces if/when replay becomes for extensive. That's always just been an understood/unwritten oversight that he umps are willing to offer, so as to prevent middle infielders from un-needed collisions and ACL tears... at least that's how I see it. If they ever open that up to replay, I don't see how they'd ever be able to allow those calls anymore. Another one is the first baseman cheating by pulling his bag foot a split second before the ball arrives, in hopes of selling the ump that he has the ball. Replay would blow those up too.

[triwak]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

The referenced play I believe was a low line drive that was ruled to have passed over third base and thus called fair by the third base umpire. I think the ball landed in foul territory. I could be wrong as I was watching Net54 at the same time.

No, if the ump called the ball fair, he must have ruled that the ball was actually a "ground ball," NOT a line drive. Any fly ball that lands in foul territory (the first time it touches the ground) is "foul." But a ground ball that first touches the ground in fair territory and then passes inside of, or over any part of the 1st or 3rd base bag, is deemed "fair."

[Paul S]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

I thought I knew the rules about fair and foul balls, but during a recent Brewers game, I became confused.

In the infield if a base umpire (1st or 3rd) deems that a ball in the infield passes over first or third base, it is deemed fair regardless of where it lands (?), according to the broadcast and the umpires in the game. Why then is a slicing line drive down the right field line that clearly passes first base in fair territory and then slices foul considered a foul ball. Deep in the corners if the ball lands in foul territory it is foul.

Questions

1. When or where does the over the base rule for the infield stop being applied?

2. or in other words how far beyond the bases does the over or inside the base rule no longer apply?

3. and finally does anyone else remember the kissing Bandit, Morganna? Her Bs qualify for this thread.

You nailed it, Frank, on the 'over the base' fair/foul topic. This is a big issue with me. The one person who has the best vantage point is really the batter. In the batters' box he/she has the best perspective: more so than the catcher and the ump(s). I once bashed what would have been a game winning ball -- adult league -- batting bi-dextrously, right over third base bag that then went into foul territory. I argued the call, and everybody told me I was wrong and that that wasn't the rule.

And yes, I remember Morganna. She had Bs. Those were times when you wouldn't get tossed into the stadium brig for running onto the field. Athough, I think 'streakers' were detained.

Bashedly, Bebe