When Is A Wild Pitch a Mild Pitch?

I don't usually comment on in-game events, but the umpire interpreted a rule in a way that I think cost the Angels a run, and possibly the game (they're in extra innings as I write), and I want the electrons arranged before tomorrow's write-ups.

Here's the deal: first and second for the Angels and AJ Burnett walks Torii Hunter. The ball caroms off Jose Molina's foot and into the stands. It's a wild pitch and -- it seems to me -- the runner on second scores. After all, as soon as the walk is recorded, that runner takes third. The WP sends him home. Likewise, the other two runners advance to second and third.

Instead, the umps ruled the ball dead and sent the runners back to their after-walk stations. HOw can that be? Does the extreme wildness of the pitch really erase its wild pitch properties? Doesn't this work the same way a wild throw would? Were the umpires making the mistake of thinking that since Erick Aybar hadn't yet reached third that the WP gave him that base? That would obviously be an error, since Aybar earned third by dint of the walk.

Surprisingly to me, neither the runners nor Mike Scioscia questioned the call. Maybe I've forgotten my rulebook, but common sense certainly dictates that everyone gets an extra base if the pitcher throws the ball into the stands.

Burnett uncorked another wildie one batter late, moving up all the runners as I described, but it should have brought in the second run and given the Halos the lead. It was a determinative call and should be addressed. Anyone got any ideas?
b