Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron
Dave, I disagree that this case is relevantly similar. 2.22.1A is a case where the runner is advancing and the defense (verbally) attempts to STOP his advance. That is correctly ruled obstruction because the advance has been hindered.
The Miami fake pickoff is legal deception intended to induce a runner to BEGIN his advance. This is not obstruction and is legal at all levels.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzy6900
As long as the defense doesn't yell "back, go, that was a foul ball" or something that is actually directed to the offense, there is no verbal obstruction. The defense yelling, "Get the ball!" is not directed to the offense and as another said, it is the offense's job to know the game situation and where the ball is. Add to that, the base coaches should be on their toes looking at what is going on.
This play is 100% legal.
|
+1000
I have been arguing these two points till I'm blue in the fingers on another board. I will just add that the difference between Verbal Interference (2-21-1) and Verbal Obstruction (2-22-1), is that for VI, confusing the defense is illegal, whereas VO, confusing the offense is not illegal. Trick plays are legal. To be Verbal Obstruction, the obstruction must be in relation to 5-1-3 or 8-3-2, which is in relation to during an intentional walk, when awarding bases to runners, or when a runner is hindered advancing or returning to their base. Trick plays, such as the fake pickoff in this case, or the hidden ball trick, etc., are NOT illegal under any rule set.