The one I always think of is in a close game runners first and third less than two outs and the runner on first takes second with no throw from the catcher. Defensive indifference? I have a tough time crediting a stolen base here.
From what I read of the rules, it is NOT indifference. As a matter of fact, the rules address the first and third situation very specifically.
I suppose the mindset is that it is not necessarily indifference, but the fact that the team is not confident they could make the play at 2nd without allowing the run. They are making a strategic decision here, not ignoring the runner because they are indifferent to her taking the base.
I have the same tough time. Especially when you see the runner skipping down to second (with a big smile and flailing her arms from side to side) or jogging past first and on to second during a continuous walk. However, after reading the rules, they convinced me that both of these cases are stolen bases.
In the end, it seems that the tougher call to make would be when it actually WAS indifference. You'd have to determine that the score was such a blowout that the opposing team had no interest in catching the runner.
@philbob
I remember hearing something to the effect that the 1st run would have been unearned, but the remaining three would be earned because they were the result of hits.
I'm interested to hear thoughts on this.