Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman
Now I have a question regarding how they write these things, specifically "the base the runner would have reached". The runner was already well on the way to the next base, where s/he would've been either safe or out. From the description, it looks like the runner was committed and had no chance to go back to the previous base safely even if force had not been an issue. Like, say the runner had already started sliding when the obstruction occurred.
If you rule that absent the obstruction, the runner would not have reached that base without being put out, what does "the base the runner would have reached" or "obtained" refer to?
|
"the base the runner would have reached" is purely umpire judgement. Different umpires might rule differently. Sometimes a partner helps, but
the judgement should be made at the point of the OBS, not however the events play out.
The runner was already well on the way to the next base We don't know when the OBS occurred. It could have been 6 feet from second base as F6 was in a cutoff position for a throw from right field.
it looks like the runner was committed and had no chance to go back to the previous base safely even if force had not been an issue. Based on the above, we don't know that. The only time I've found reference to a baserunner being "committed" is in regards to the Look Back rule. Bumping into F6 10 feet from second base would certainly give the runner an opportunity to retreat to second base.
say the runner had already started sliding when the obstruction occurred. If we're assuming the runner was sliding into third base, it's unlikely that F6 would be the offending obstructionist. In that case, F5 may have been blocking the base without the ball. But it is F6 who was called for OBS.