Don,
So you are asking about bases attempted beyond the base the runner is initially protected to.
If that is the case, in my opinion, then any benifit fo the doubt must be given to the obstructed runner. The first bit of post obstruction evidence I would consider would be the duration of the obstruction, ie; was it a bumb and the runner lost a step or two, or was the runner tripped and had to speend several seconds getting up and figuring out which direction to go to the next base. If the runner would have been involved in a close play absent the obstruction, she would be safe. IF she would have been out by a considerable amount, then she attempted a base too far.
(I think you have to lean toward giveing the runner the benifit of the doubt, because if it had been a close play absent the obstruction, then the fielder might not have been able to make the catch/apply the tag. The offense is the offending team, and therefore the burden must be placed upon them to show that the out would have been definite.
Mike,
If the runner is making a legitimate attempt to advance, and the defense commits the illgal offense of obstructing her, then a penalty is to be applied per the rules. Fed, Pony, and USSSA are all clear that an obstructed runner may not be put out between the two bases where whe was obstructed.
I quote from FED 8-4-3 "A runner is entitled to advance without liability to be put out when: (...)
...b. a fielder not in possession of the ball, not in the act of fielding a batted ball, or not about to receive a thrown ball, impeds the progress of a runner or batter-runner who is legally running bases.(...)PENALTY
...)An obstructed runner may not be called out between the two bases where they were obstructed unless properly appealed for missing a base, leaving a base before a fly ball was first touched, for an act of interference, or if passing another runner.(...)"
In your play you seem to be referenceing my last paragraph.
If the runner is only rounding the base, is not making a legitimate attempt to advance, and the bump/contact occures, that is not obstruction.
However if the runner is attempting to advance, even if it is the umpire's opinion that the advance is ill advised, the defense is required to allow the runner to run the bases unimpeded. If they fail to do so they must suffer the penalty outlined, and the runner may not be put out before the next base.
If the runner rounds the base, and is attempting to return when the bump occures, then she would be protected back to the base, and could not be put out before reaching the rounded base, as the retreat is a legitimate attempt to return to the base.
This is not a change for 2002. It was the new rule in 2001. Prior to 2001 ther was a minimun award for obstruction of at least one base beyond the point of obstruction, ie runner rounds 1st base, starts to return and is blocked by F4 as F3 received a throw behing her. We would have awarded 2nd prior to 2001. Now she would be protected back to 1st.
Roger Greene
ps.I don't know how that little face got in the message,and I don't know how to get it out. Its not part of the Fed rule book.
RG
[Edited by Roger Greene on Jan 29th, 2002 at 10:46 PM]