View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 05:47pm
mcrowder mcrowder is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
There is some logic in not protecting home here. I see why a lot of people think you should. Their thinking being --- if there was no obstruction, the runner would have been 2-3 steps further along the basepath than she ended up being, so obviously if she's out on a banger, she would have been safe if there were no obstruction.

Here's why they may be wrong, and why the umpire needs to decide immediately where the runner should be protected to, without adjusting for subsequent play.

In this play, BU feels, at the time of the OBS, that runner would not advance past third based on what he sees at that moment. Assuming he is right in that judgement... had there been no obstruction, the runner would have at least slowed at third base, and not advanced until seeing the bobble (and may have even been stopped or returning when the bobble occurred). It's even possible that the timing of the obstruction allowed her to reach home BEFORE she would have had there been no obstruction, because the timing of the obstruction allowed her to not break stride after the bobble.

This may seem a stretch, but I believe it is the reasoning that we should consider when we doubt the rule that is out there now.
Reply With Quote