Mon Jun 25, 2007, 07:54pm
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Bend, In.
Posts: 2,192
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TussAgee11
2 points of clarification I wish to get insight on.
1) I still don't understand how the obstruction allowed R1 to get back to second quicker. If there is no obstruction, he makes it farther towards 3rd base, which puts him in even more of a rundown, as 3rd was occupied by R2. To me, negating the obstruction makes R1 even MORE out in that run down. How did F6 slowing R1s ADVANCE obstruct R1s RETREAT towards 2nd?
2) MLB rule 7.06 reads "The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out." Now it seems as though R1 had legally touched 2nd, and therefore, should be awarded third. All preceding runners (which would be R2?) would advance if forced (R2 to home, because of force, correct?).
Is this just an OBR error? If so, how should the rule read (or at least its interpretation...)
|
You're looking at 7.06(a). You need to look at 7.06(b).
Tim.
|