View Single Post
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 31, 2010, 07:03pm
IRISHMAFIA IRISHMAFIA is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueit View Post
But that's what's been suggested above. Umpire should award a base (a "more than halfway" rule of thumb was suggested) to a runner who hasn't been affected by the obstruction. The runner was rounding 2B when the obs. occurred at home plate.

Or in the 8.4.3 Sit A example, the runner between 1B & 2B wasn't affected by the obstruction occurring at SS. Yet is she awarded 2B? (She can't be put on 1B, where the batter is.)
No, the umpire is actually allowing the runner to complete the runner task, but if you want to call it an award, that's fine.

Now, if you need justification, you can "award" that runner 3B because s/he was indeed affected by the OBS. How, you ask? Simple since the dead ball ruling is dictated by the rule, the OBS call kept that runner from reaching the base s/he would have reached had the OBS not occurred. Of course, you could "judge" that the runner would not have reasonably reached 3B safely and leave him/her at 2B.

Cannot do anything more for you. It IS the way it is in all games of which I am aware.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote