Quote:
Originally posted by Carl Childress
If it's obstruction, the runner must go to second. You can't protect him back to first; he's ALREADY protected to first.On the McGriff's Board we discussed a play where a runner was obstructed at third and later tagged out 5 feet from home. In other words, he advanced 85 feet after the obstruction; and someone argued that -- in and of itself -- did not prove intent to advance! And the runner, therefore, could be out.
Here's the key to an obstruction call: It is obstruction if a fielder who is not protected impedes or hinders the advance or return of a runner during a fair or catchable batted ball or during a thrown ball. (J/R, 70)
"Might have advanced" isn't good enough. After all, I was castigated in harsh terms for thinking that an actual advance of 85 feet was -- an advance!
|
It is the judgement of the official whether or not he felt the runner may have advanced on the play. You are not required to award 2nd base in this play if you felt the runner was not going to advance as a part of the play.
The situation that was presented to you at McGriff's, Carl, was in refute to your statement that the official MUST award the runner the next base. That refute still exists.
If, as the official, you feel the runner reacts to your obstruction call and runs to 2nd feeling he is "protected" as a result of the obstruction, he is not necessarily protected. It remains your judgement as to whether
you felt the runner would have attempted further advance to 2nd base during the play had it not been for the obstruction. That is the determining factor as to whether you protect him to 2nd base.
I was umpiring a game where an overthrown ball to F3 on a pickoff allowed R1 to advance to 2nd base.
After slowing down considerably and rounding 2nd he was obstructed by F4 (causing him to fall to ground) which I declared. This runner, however, didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of reaching 3rd base during the original play. After my declaration of obstruction, R1 then recovered and continued toward 3rd base where he was thrown out by maybe 5-8 steps. I had only protected him BACK to 2nd base on the obstruction call since he had slowed down during the play and had no legitimate opportunity of advancing to 3rd base. His advance was a mere result of hearing my declaration and, IMO, trying to force an award to 3B or perhaps to cause another overthrow for further advance. The out stood on the play since he advanced beyond the base to which he was protected.
IMO, you are not required to award one base merely because you called the obstruction. This concept is supported by the JEA quotes of my initial post. Whether he "might have advanced" (per Carl) is part of the official's thought process in determining whether you felt he would have advanced. As stated previously, I provide any benefit of doubt to the offense since it was the defense that was the offending team.
Just my opinion,
Freix
[Edited by Bfair on Jul 1st, 2001 at 03:26 PM]