Sal,
#1. OBR 7.06 states:
"When obstruction occurs, the umpire shall call or signal "Obstruction." (a) If a play is being made on the obstructed runner."
As you wrote, "When the obstruction occured the (BATTED) ball was in the air" therefore the obstruction did not occure when a play was being made on the runner so it's not type A.
#2. Dave Hensley's above post follows.
"Section 6.3 of the MLB Umpires Manual, entitled OBSTRUCTION AND INTERFERENCE PLAYS: APPROVED RULINGS includes this play:
Ruling:
......This is obstruction under Official Baseball Rule 7.06(b). The umpire should call the infraction when it occurs and award bases, if any, in the appropriate manner.
It's pretty clear that the MLB Umpire Manual says that this obstruction should be handled under "B"
#3. Emmel pointed to Lopez and called obstruction, signifying it was type "B" and play continued.
#4. There was never "play" on the runner as the throw was cut off. Type "B"
I was surprised at the ruling and further surprised by the Umpires Manual, even though it called it type "B". The ruling appears to me to be LL'ish or FEDish but not MLB. I've got a bad call.
BTW I did get the PM you sent me last Friday and answered it last Saturday but never heard back. This will clarify my position, Regards. G.
---------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally posted by Sal Giaco
After considering how this entire play unfolded, I think I figured out how they came about their ruling.
As soon as the SS and 3B screened the runner, Emmel acknwledged the obstruction by pointing at it. However, he did not kill it right away because the ball was still in the air. This is one of those rare times you do NOT kill the ball immediately for Type A obstruction because if the ball is dropped or gets past the fielder, then the offensive team can possibly advance further - similar to when there is a rundown and the obstruction occurs when the ball is in the air between the two fielers.
As soon as the LF caught the ball (or just there after since he threw the ball into the infield right after he caught it), Emmel killed the play and enforced the Type A obstruction and immediately awarded the runner home. As usual, the big leaguers get it right it just took a while for me to figure out how they came about their ruling.
If you think about the "intent" of the player(s) who caused the obstruction, I think that act has to been enforced as Type A with an automatic base award. If you enforce it as Type B, then what would stop fielders from trying to do that every time? Bottom line... you could clearly see the "rattyness" by the SS when he came over and in my opinion, purposely try to obstruct the runner's view of the catch. Once you see that, why give the fielder the benefit of the doubt? That guttsy call by Emmel will discourage fielders from doing something stupid like that again. And the best thing about it is he got it RIGHT!
|