[DownTownTonyBrown]

The obstruction rule is not well stated. In my opinion the rule would be better stated as "the runner should be protected in the direction they are traveling when an attempted play is being made and the runner is obstructed." In the original post, the runner should have been protected going back into 1st - if F3 caught the ball and tagged the runner we would have protected him because he was obstructed from reaching the base before the ball got there. That play is now done and over and the runner is safe at 1st - no more protection. Now if the ball got away from F3, that particular play is still done and over. Protecting the runner to second is ludicrous. To suggest that the runner can now get up and walk to second without fear of being put out is crazy. If that were the case we, as umpires, should just award the runner 2nd. The runner knew he was in jeopardy of being put out - that is why he ran and tried to beat the throw. Now you want to jump into the play and protect the runner? I think not.

My statement of the rule is not enough though. It does not cover obstruction when a play is NOT being made on the runner. I sense the rules committee has tried to reward the runner, in this case, with perhaps more than he would have acheived on his own. As a penalty to the defense for interrupting the runner's actions when no play is being made (the defense is just in the runner's path), the rules protect the runner to the next base. This takes away the defense's opportunity to make an out that they may have had a shot at. This is applicable to the runner bumping F5 after passing 3rd and then being awarded home.

Not sure how rule changes are submitted but if anyone out there knows, I would suggest that the obstruction rule be broken into separate situations for obstruction when a play is being made and for obstruction when a play is not being made. I would suggest to all umpires that it be enforced this way also.

A new rules statement something along these lines would be good:

A runner shall be protected in the direction of their travel when an attempted play for an out is being made on that runner and obstruction occurs. If no attempted play for an out is being made and obstruction occurs, the runner shall be protected to the base that the umpire feels the runner would have acheived had the obstruction not occurred.

Can anyone help us make a change? Of course I feel this is really more of a clarification than a change.