Quote:
Originally Posted by EsqUmp
The reason I asked how close the play was is because that should be some indication as to whether the umpire should have "protected" your runner all the way to home plate. When a runner is obstructed and thrown out on a very close play, you can almost always bet that the runner should be awarded that base. Obstruction is a rule of equity, so he should protect the runner to the base she would have had had she not been obstruction. The umpire doesn't have to make up his mind immediately at the time of the obstruction. He can let the play continue and use what happens as evidence as to what base the runner who have received had she not been obstructed.
Umpires are (should be) taught to err on the side of protecting the runner too far rather than not far enough. Otherwise, the defense might as well obstruct every runner that they have no chance of getting out.
|
The umpire should determine the base the runner would have obtained at the time of the obstruction. Subsequent action is irrelevant. I will give you some examples.
Example 1: R1 on 1st. Outfield playing in. A base hit to the outfield. R1 is obstructed between 1st and 2nd. The umpire judges she would have only made 2nd. F9 misses the cut off and the ball sails over to the third base fence. R1 tries for third and is put out. What do you have? I have an out because the errant throw was irrelevant.
Example 2: R1 on 1st. A base hit to the outfield. It's in the gap. R1 is obstructed between 1st and 2nd. The umpire determines she would have obtained 3rd. R1 rounds 2nd hesitates and then tries for third and is out by a good 5 feet. What do you have? I have obstruction and I award 3rd. The fact that she hesitated is irrelevant.