[bob jenkins]

From an esteemed member on another forum:

This play has been on my mind for two weeks. As I indicated in my prior post in this thread, we have been debating the video posted in this thread in my high school association before this thread even started.

I don't normally do this, but this time I made an exception, and called one of my contacts from my professional umpiring days. [I am not going to name drop...so don't ask.] I can CONCLUSIVELY state that both an PBUC and a MLB umpiring executive believe "obstruction" is the correct call in the play shown on the video posted on this thread under OBR.

It was explained to me that a fielder who deflects a batted ball and then chases after it is not protected while he is chasing after it. (We all know that!) They further stated that the fielder who chased after it CAN regain protection if he reaches a point where he is no longer chasing after the batted ball and is again in the act of fielding the ball. However, the key on the professional level is whether or not the RUNNER has sufficient time to see that the fielder is no longer chasing after the ball, and is, in fact, in the act of fielding the ball and thus is given a reasonable opportunity to adjust where he is running in order to avoid the contact. What is not important is whether or not the fielder has the ball in his possession. In fact, the fielder does not have to actually have possession of the ball to be protected: all that matters is that he has stopped chasing the ball (it is within a step) AND the runner has an opportunity to see that the fielder is no longer chasing after the ball (and is now fielding the ball) and thus is given an opportunity to avoid the fielder.

Both executives were in agreement that the runner in the play shown on the video posted in this thread had no opportunity to avoid the contact which resulted from the pitcher running and stopping in the B/R's path (regardless of whether or not the fielder had picked up the ball or stopped running after the ball at the time of the collision). Because the runner had no reasonable opportunity to avoid the contact, the onus was on the fielder (who deflected the ball and chased after the ball into the runner's path) to avoid impeding the runner. Thus, obstruction is the correct call.

They were clear in stating that each play would have to be evaluated on its own merits. They stated that there is NO blanket rule as to how long a fielder must have been stopped from chasing a ball (and in the act of fielding it again) in order to conclusively determine if the runner was given a reasonable opportunity to avoid the contact.

You can, if you desire, argue all you want. I did NOT get this information second hand; it was told to me directly. Obstruction is the definitive ruling in both MLB and MiLB on the play shown on the video in this thread. Thus, my statement as to what I thought was the right call on the play in this video that I wrote in my first post in this thread is/was wrong. Mea Culpa.