Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tibear
Can't tell exactly when the obstruction took place but we know it happened right at second base and by the time the ball gets to the infield R1 is at least halfway to third. R1 then realizes that R2 is standing on third and tries to retreat to second and is tagged out.
The play on R1 wasn't immediately after the obstruction and didn't ultimately prevent him from gaining access to the base to which he was obstructed(3rd). He was tagged out going back to a base to which he wasn't obstructed (2nd).
How can the umpires say that the obstruction prevented R1 from getting back to second? R1 made the decision to continue on towards third base after the obstruction call without looking to see what R2 was doing and as a result got caught too far off the base to get back in time. If anything the obstruction prevented the runner from getting even further away from second and made the tag at second closer then it should have been!
Lawump, I agree with your analysis of what took place on the call and that the umpires determined the obstruction prevented R1 from getting back to second but I'm just not buying it.
All I see is bad baserunning.
|
R1 was obstructed as he rounded 2nd. At that moment, the umpires must decide where to protect him. He will either be protected to 3rd or back to 2nd. Since R2 stopped at 3rd, the only place to protect R1 was back to 2nd.
R1 did indeed continue toward 3rd before he began his retreat. He was thrown out sliding back into 2nd. Without the obstruction, R1 would have made it back to 2nd safely. The time he lost due to the obstruction directly led to the defense's ability to put him out sliding back into 2nd.