Lapopez,
Trust me, you are not the only one who is uncertain about the proper way to apply these statements.
Here's how I think of it.
Under FED rules, if a runner is obstructed, he ALWAYS gets a minimum award of one base beyond his position at the time he was obstructed.
So, if the runner is obstructed while attempting to return to a base he has already acquired, he gets the "next" base.
If, despite the obstruction, the runner reaches a base beyond his position at the time he was obstructed, AND the umpire determines that was all he would have gotten had he not been obstructed, the obstruction is "ignored".
So, I would say the "order of precedence" of the three satements you pose is
3
2
1
JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
|