[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
”The ASA NUS has instructed umpires they are to make the judgment of what base the runner would have achieved had there been no obstruction at the time of the obstruction and not have that judgment affected by subsequent play action.”

I am not sure that you can always make a quality decision at the time of obstruction. At that point you have to assume how the play will end. Your assumption is based on how a typical runner and a typical fielder would react.

Suppose the batter hit a single into RF, and is bumped off stride by F3 camped on 1B. You are inside; you see the obstruction; you see F9 chasing down the ball; you imagine a throw to 2B. You assume a routine single and will protect the runner back to 1B.

But this runner flies into 2B and is tagged just inches short of the base. Now what? Because you mis-judged her speed are you going to send her back to 1B?

A rule and it's interpretation cannot be so varied as to be intended to make up for an umpire's poor judgment or lack of knowledge.

Let’s make it a little more extreme. The ball is hit into the gap between F7 and F8. Again you have obstruction at 1B; you assume a routine double and protect her in your mind at that point to 2B. No way is she supposed to make it to 3B! But she has a real set of wheels and she doesn’t even slow down at second and flies into 3B. You discover that F8 does not have a good arm and you have a 3-hop throw into 3B where the runner is out on a bang-bang play.

Now what? Your assumptions are all blown to hell. The runner is way faster than typical; the outfielder has a weaker arm than expected, and it is obvious that, in the actual play the obstruction is the sole cause of the player being tagged out. Are you going to call her out because you assumed a routine double based on typical runner/fielder skills?

I don't know what is more extreme, the play or your imagination. If the runner was THAT fast and the throw THAT weak, and the umpire's assumptions blown to hell, how was the runner put out?

Personally, I believe that you have to see the action at the end of the play to quantify your protection decision. If the runner goes beyond the base you originally assumed protection, and is put out on a close play then I think that you revise your original assumption and protect the runner to that base. If the runner is “out by a mile,” then I think that you can say your original assumption was correct and the runner went past your protection point – and the out would stand.

But – I am obviously not NUS and I don’t know if that was a narrow interpretation based on a unique set of events; or it is a broad interpretation to be used in all obstruction cases. I’ll be in South Bend in March for NUS and we’ll see if this comes up, or can be brought up.

WMB

I think the narrow interpretation is of the members on this board, not the staff. Everyone is acting like the umpire must make a decision on this before the left arm is fully extended. Micromanagement at it's best! (no puns please)

As I've said before, this interpretation was based on a play where the runner was protected to 2B and when the throw arrived at the closest infielder, it bounced away and the umpire wanted to redesignate the base to which the runner was protected.

I don't believe, and I could be wrong or maybe I wasn't clear enough, that anyone ever said you couldn't assess the play, but the umpire must know to what base they are protecting the runner. You cannot wait until the play is over or any subsequent play has been made to make that determination.

The umpire needs to know whether the call is going to be "dead ball" or "OUT" if the obstructed runner is tagged off the base. The umpire cannot be standing there with an arm extended, have a play, take a look at the play and rule "OUT". That would give you a quick route to a protest.