[CecilOne]

I agree with "the latter makes much more sense" in "whether the judgment is made at the time of the OBS and not changed thereafter, or whether the judgment is allowed to change based on how the play unfolds."

I copied and slightly edited my comment from an earlier topic:

"there are two aspects of the effect of obstruction.

One is that the runner can not be putout in between the bases where the OBS occurred. That is, if runner was obstructed between 2nd and 3rd, the runner can not be put out between 2nd and 3rd. The runner could be put out between 3rd and home.

The other is that the obstructed runner will be awarded the base the umpire JUDGED the runner would have reached if there was no obstruction. This can get complicated, but in the simple case where the runner is apparently put out in a close play at a base, the runner should be awarded that base because the umpire JUDGED the runner would have reached that base if there was no obstruction.

That is, if a runner is obstructed between 2nd and 3rd, then "tagged out" in a close play at home; the runner should be awarded home. In the above, "a close play" is determined by the runner being out by a margin equal to or less than the delay caused by the obstruction.

The above runner is also guaranteed not being put out between 2nd and 3rd, so if the runner falls down before 3rd and is tagged the runner is not out. The ball is then dead and the umpire awards the runner 3rd base if the umpire JUDGED the runner would have reached that base if there was no obstruction or 2nd if the umpired JUDGED otherwise. "


I can't see determining a "protected to" base at the moment of the OBS, for the same reason that you can't tell a single from a double when the ball is struck. Many things affect the outcome and can't all be calculated at the beginning like a video game. Yes, we have to consider if a runner tried something different because they were obstructed; but in general runners get where they were trying to anyway and all we have to do is add the delay time.