|
12U
Batter hits to RF between RF and CF, ball is passing them. BR is obstructed by F3 standing directly on first base. I put the arm up, and immediately decide this hit was likely a triple had she not been obstructed. BR continues, and is again obstructed by both 2B and SS standing on and near second base. Ball has not yet been picked up by F9, but is about to be. On this obstruction alone, I again decide she'd get 3rd if there had been no obstruction.
Ball is retrieved, BR rounds 3rd base about 4 big steps, but decides to return to third base. If it matters, the throw would probably have beaten her by a couple of steps, had she decided to try to score (I know - this is not supposed to come into play in our decision regarding runner placement --- just trying to give you a picture of the play).
I leave BR at 3rd, no one complains, and life moves on.
I start thinking about it later. When making the decision on the 2nd obstruction (really 2nd and 3rd obstruction) at 2nd base, should I have taken into account that she would have been 2-3 steps farther along the basepaths had the FIRST obstruction not occurred? If she was 2-3 steps farther along at that point, I'm probably thinking about awarding home on that obstruction (again, the ball had not yet been picked up in RF).
Question is - SHOULD we consider the prior act when determining runner placement on a subsequent obstruction? Can't find support for it in the book, but logic tells me that if the purpose of the OBS penalty is to award what would have happened had the OBS not occurred, I can only think that this runner would have scored if no one would have OBS'd (and I likely would have made that judgement before seeing the throw come in from RF).
|