Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Anyone want to debate that it is meant to keep a level playing field and make sure the obstruction doesn't give the defense an advantage? I don't think many would disagree with that.
|
Not me, anyway. Although I have toyed in the past with various ideas of adding a punitive aspect to it. But that would be a rule change discussion. Certainly, the rule is as you say.
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
However, how many believe it is a free pass for the runner to keep going as long as they can until played upon regardless of the defense's play?
|
I don't believe that, either. If that is what you understood me to be saying, then I didn't explain myself very well. I'll followup more on this point below.
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
I knew this would be an issue and specifically asked the question of Steve Rollins. He emphasized "at the time of the obstruction." I don't think I heard him wrong and Steve can check with Luau as I was sitting next to the PA delegation at the time... Until I'm told differently, I'll stick with what I'm instructed to do by the NUS. After all, is that not part of their job, and ours?
|
Sure, fine for those in attendance. I'd very much like this put into the POE on obstruction, through. That seems like the natural place for it. Until then, I will remain just a bit skeptical that this is a ruling fully supported by the majority of the NUS, since it does not seem to fit the intent of the rule as I read it. (This ruling also conflicts with NCAA, if memory serves - although I am not a reliable source on that)
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Try this. The batter gets a hit to RF and is obstructed by F3. The runner continues to advance to 2B to which the BU had him protected. As he approaches 2B, F6 has the throw from F9 short hop and bounce off his glove about 10' straight up (as the BU, you think that there just may be a chance here, but you're not sure). Seeing this, the runner continues through 2B, but is easily put out about 3 steps from 3B.
Now what do you do? Are you waiting to see if the runner is put out prior to determining which base to which he was protected?
|
If the runner
continued because of the muffed play, then protection stops where I originally judged. If the runner is full-bore all the way, muff or no, and is out by less than the judged effect of the obs, then I've got dead ball, award base. The runner does not get a free pass to do whatever until played on. To be protected beyond the initial judgment (i.e. for me to modify my judgment), she has to run the bases in such a way that I am convinced to extend the protection - i.e. I was too hasty in judging how far
this runner on
this play would have reached had there been no obs.
The rule, as I read it, does not ask us to create a mythical ending of the play assuming a perfectly played ball that we then use to judge base awards. It simply asks us to judge
"the base which would have been reached had there not been obstruction..."
To do otherwise means that a poorly playing defense actually benefits from the obstruction, in that it may limit how far the runner can go when they muff the play. I.e. slowing the runner down gave them the chance to recover from their muff and get the runner at third.
Sorry, but I'll need to see that interp in writing.