[Dakota]

I'll give my 2 cents here...

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
This came from the "troll's" board, which BTW, is getting better if you haven't been there lately.

Agreed... but the improvement is tenuous since it is still a wide-open forum.

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
The question evolves around when you decide what base to protect a runner to; and can that decision be changed based on unexpected actions by either the defense or offense before the play has run it course.

Situation: Long ball hit down LF line. F3 camped on 1B; B-R bounces off her, stumbles, rights herself, and continues toward 2B. In your opinion, you have a routine double and you are going to protect runner to 2B.

However, F7 gets a little casual with her relay throw, and F6 has to go out further than expected. Runner, expecting to catch F6 by surprise, hits 2B full steam and tries for 3B. F6 finally reacts and just gets runner at 3B in a bang-bang play.

Now what? Do you say that you only protected runner to 2B; thus she was on her own and the out at 3B stands?

Or, because it was close at third it is obvious that the obstruction prevented her from getting to 3B ahead of the throw - so safe at 3B?

Did you protect her to 2B assuming normal action from the defense?

Or can you assume the casual play is part of the game and that the runner had a legitimate shot at 3B, thus should have been protected to 3B?

I'm sure that we all agree to let the play come to it's "normal" conclusion before finalizing our decision as to what base to protect the runner. But will non-normal actions change our decision?

WMB

Well, the answer in my view is both. I make an initial assessment assuming the play proceeds "normally." But, I also re-assess my judgment based on how the play proceeds.

Certainly, in your scenario, a case could be made that the reason F7 was casual with the play was because the runner was delayed and F7 thought there was plenty of time, etc. However, I wouldn't give the defense the benefit of that doubt since they are the team at fault, and in your scenario, I have dead ball and runner awarded 3rd on the obstruction, since clearly the runner was cost more than a step by the infraction.