|
And while your citation is correct, Roger, it must be kept in proper perspective.
You shouldn't protect an obstructed runner to a base that he could not have obtained absent of the obstuction (except in Fed's case where a one base award is mandated). In Buckeye's example, the BR's ability to get to 3B means nothing if a preceding runner must occupy that base. IOW, since the preceding runner is occupying that base, the obstructed runner could not have acquired it absent of the obstruction.
With that in mind, the rule citation you provide is truly only applicable to where an obstructed runner is provided his mandated one base award, thus causing a preceding runner occupying that awarded base to advance an additional base. I'm open to anyone who can offer a scenerio other than that of awarding the mandated base.....
IMO, this is an excellent example of the difference in understanding the game and its application of the rules vs. merely citing a rule that could masquerade as support of an extremely poor judgment decision.
Just my opinon,
Freix
|