Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PeteBooth
FED OBS
Sitch:
B1 hits a gapper and trys for a double. As he rounds first base he is obstructed by F3.
When we see the OBS infraction we signal and say that's OBS but DO NOT kill the play. In FED we wait until all playing action ends before we enforce.
Since B1 was obstructed after acquiring first base he is going to get at least second base.
Now B1 achieves second base and trys to strecth the double into a triple. Subsequently he is thrown out at third base.
RULING: Unless there is post obstruction evidence ie; The fielder bobbled the ball or mis played the ball the out at third stands
Why!
Because the runner achieved the base he would have achived absent the OBS.
IMO, FED is much easier to understand and enforce meaning the obstructed runner ALWAYS gets a minimum of a one base award from his position at the time of OBS and we wait until all action is ceased before enforcing. If the runner achives his one base minimum and advances further he does so at his own peril.
Pete Booth
|
To give a more specific example of the problem I have with the three statements occurs when a runner is obstructed returning to a base and successfully reaches that base. The rule says to ignore the obstruction in that situation. But it also says award a minimum of one base beyond his position at the time of the obstruction.
Pete, how about a slight twist to your situation--a more frequent occurrence. Instead of a gapper, it was a straight forward base hit in which there was no chance of B1 trying for or achieving second base. Nevertheless, as you wrote, as he rounds first base, he is obstructed by F3. Is that an automatic award of second base even though, had there been no obstruction, the runner would have achieved no further than first base, in the umpire's opinion? You probably can sense that I have a problem awarding second in this situation. I didn't learn the rule originally that this was an automatic award and I want to know if in FED it is.