Here is the insane High School play of the day...

Bases loaded...no outs...the batter hits a Texas leaguer into short right field. The right fielder comes charging in, the first and second basemen busting out...they converge and the ball falls to the ground. The right fielder scoops it up and fires a strike to the catcher in front of the dish. He tags the runner from third prior to him reaching the plate.

You with me so far? As the ball was in the air, the pitcher, WATCHING THE BALL NOT WHERE HE WAS GOING, heads to first to cover the unoccupied base. Only, he sideswipes the B/R before he gets there and knocks him down. Obstruction is called, and since the ball was being held by the catcher, “Time” was called. The B/R was awarded second base on the obstruction, pushing home TWO RUNS. That’s correct, the out at the plate was nullified and the runners on second and third were scored because of the award.

The defensive head coach goes nuts and winds up getting tossed during the explanation. The next batter is in his on deck circle and starts laughing. The catcher walks over to him and they get into it. The catcher gets dumped when he pushes the on deck batter down.
Calm is restored and the game goes eleven innings before the team that benefited from the obstruction wins on a passed ball.

What do you think of the rulings?

"...if the batter-runner is obstructed before reaching first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached had there been no obstruction."

sounds good to me.

"...if the batter-runner is obstructed before reaching first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached had there been no obstruction."

What code is this, Fed? Is this also the OBR rule?

And the OBS came <i>before</i> the out at home?

[Edited by greymule on May 19th, 2004 at 05:22 PM]

Why 2nd?
 

Looks to be OBR 7.06(a)
7.06
When obstruction occurs, the umpire shall call or signal "Obstruction."
(a) If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batter runner is obstructed before he touches first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance, without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire's judgment, if there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. (Which, would be 1st) Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out.

So my question would be "What made you think the BR would reach 2nd?" If the catcher is holding the ball why would you think another runner would make it to home safely if the F1 and the BR had not collided?

Sounds like the right fielder, F9, made and incredible play. Sounds like the BR probably was watching the flight of the ball also and probably was a contributor to the collision. He likely only would have went to 2nd had the throw to home gotten away from the catcher allowing R2 to score also.

I wasn't there but I think you may have "over" awarded.

In OBR no play is being made on the BR, so obstruction is called by not penalty. In FED the BR gets 1B, even though no play is being made on him. Runners advance, run scores, no out at the plate. I don't see the BR going to 2B at all and 2 runs scoring. If he had not made it to 1B yet, and the catcher has the ball, how can we develop an opinion that he would have made it 2B? I don't see "any possibility" the BR makes it to 2B on this play, and the defense has already been punished by removing an out an other team getting a run on the ruling. I'm not going to give the offense 2 runs. Can't see it.

Hold on here. Bases loaded, no outs. BR bunts up the 1B line. F3 charges and and fields the ball, then throws home for the force out. F2 then throws to F4 covering 1B in an attempt to get BR, but F3 obstucts BR before he gets to 1B.

We cancel the out at home and score the run? I don't believe it.

Again, are we talking FED or OBR? In previous example there was no play being made on runner going to 1B (ie throw from RF to home), so in OBR the obstruction is called but no penalty. In FED he is awarded 1B and all runners are forced, which removes the out.

Two differences in your example. One, the throw is from 1B not RF, and the possibility of a play on the BR is very real, unlike earlier situation. So in this case, in FED or OBR the BR has been obstructed and there was a play on him so he is awarded 1B and all runners advance with no outs.

Believe.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DG
[B]7.06 says 'or if BR is going to first', it makes no mention about whether there's a play on him or not. I read that as he gets 1st, and runners advance one base w/o liability, 1 run scores, and the force out at the plate is removed.

7.06 says 'or if BR is going to first', it makes no mention about whether there's a play on him or not. I read that as he gets 1st, and runners advance one base w/o liability, 1 run scores, and the force out at the plate is removed. [/B][/QUOTE]

You might want to read 7.06 again. 7.06(a) starts out with "if a play is being made on the obstructed runner". 7.06(b) starts out with "if no play is being made on the obstructed runner"

OBR:

I believe there is a misinterpretation of 7.06 here. If the defense gets an out before the BR is obstructed on his way to 1B, I believe the out stands, BR gets 1B, and the other runners are placed where they belong. The out at home is not nullified.

Abel on 1B. Baker hits a one-hopper to F6, who steps on 2B to force Abel. Baker is then obstructed on his way to 1B. No way Abel is then ruled safe at 2B. If the OBS occurs before Abel is put out, that is a different story.

I cannot find anything in PBUC or J/R to justify nullifying an out already made.

Fed:

All I have is a 2002 book. Where does anyone see that OBS can nullify an out made before the OBS?

[Edited by greymule on May 20th, 2004 at 12:23 AM]

Memory serves me that the basis of the obstruction penalty is to remove the effects of the obstruction. Direct (type 'A') the affected runner cannot be put out between the bases where it occurred and gets the forward base. Type 'B' just award bases to cancel the effects of the OBS - simplistically put. But I can't imagine taking away the effects of plays made before the OBS or even outs made after indirect OBS when unaffected runners are put out.

In fact even if BR is obstructed before 1b he/she does not automatically get the base when the BR would have been out regardless - specifically on a caught fly ball.

And it continues with "OR if the batter-runner is obstructed before he touches first base.."

So, in OBR, it's type A, the ball is dead, BR is awarded at least first (farther if the umpires so judge), other runners are awarded the base they would have reached (again umpire judgment). If the umpires in the play at hand judge that's second for BR, then the other runners will be "forced" to advance and the runs will count.

Under FED, all obstruction is a delayed dead ball. Outs on unobstructed runners stand. The rest of the award is as above.

Then in OBR (and Fed), how would we rule this play?:

Abel on 1B, no outs. Baker grounds to F3, who throws to F6 to force Abel at 2B. F1, running to cover 1B, <i>then</i> gets tangled up with BR in the baseline before 1B.

Is Abel's out at 2B actually nullified by OBS that occurs afterward? Hard to believe, and I can't find any case play to support that.

Apparently the ruling on the play that started this thread was incorrect. The out at home should have stood.

J/R gives a play that might be instructive here, but only by inference. I'll post it tonight after I get home from work.

Fed ruling on this
 

Guys,
This was a High School game. The OBR has no bearing.
The ball dropped uncaught in righht field. The batter runner would ahve made it to first no problem. He was clocked two steps from the bag.

I'm looking for a Fed interp.

<b>I'm looking for a Fed interp.</b>

Bob Jenkins gave us a Fed interp:

<b>Under FED, all obstruction is a delayed dead ball. Outs on unobstructed runners stand. The rest of the award is . . .

BR is awarded at least first (farther if the umpires so judge), other runners are awarded the base they would have reached (again umpire judgment). If the umpires in the play at hand judge that's second for BR, then the other runners will be "forced" to advance and the runs will count.</b>

Since the runner out at home was unobstructed, his out should stand. Runners not put out would score if forced home by the award to the BR.

Re: Fed ruling on this
 

Probably the closest I see in the 2003 case book is 8.3.2 Sit d, pg 58.

Although, in the sit. the out is registered after the obstruction, I believe because there is a delayed dead ball any out registered on the unobstructed runners remain.

Nightmare Obstruction
 

This was my nightmare game.

I've been at this awhile and never seen anything close.

Bob, which rule are you referring to that allows the out to stand?

The runner from third held because he thought the ball would be caught. The obstruction occurred before the out at the dish. Because the B/R was not allowed the opportunity to gain first base, I allowed the two runs to score and awarded him one base past the base he would have had.

I'm not looking for an "attaboy". I just know that I will see this coach over the course of the playoffs and want to be prepared.

Again
 

I see no reason to award the BR 2nd. The throw by F9 to home was great (sounds like to me). No other runners would have advanced (bases were loaded). BR would have stopped at 1st even if not obstructed, because other runners were stacked up in front of him not moving because the catcher has the ball.

Try NFHS 8-1-1e, & 8-3-2

Sounds like a great defensive play. If I understand the situation correctly, I would have let the out at home stand and put the BR on 1st. Play ball.

The collision at/before 1st was incidental and did not affect the other runners - let the defense's efforts stand.

Perhaps it was different than I have understood.

Re: Nightmare Obstruction
 

Case 8.3.2D has a play where an out that occurs after obstruction is allowed to stand (you have to get past the strange wording in the penultimate sentence -- replace "Because of" with "Despite"

Quote:

The runner from third held because he thought the ball would be caught. The obstruction occurred before the out at the dish. Because the B/R was not allowed the opportunity to gain first base, I allowed the two runs to score and awarded him one base past the base he would have had.

Why do you say BR was not allowed the opportunity to reach first? As I read the play, he reached it, despite the obstruction.

The penalty for obstruction is not "one base past the base he would have had" it's "one base beyond his position on base when the obstruction occurred." (8-3-2)

Same thing here, I can't see giving the runner second base when the bases were loaded and the catcher is holding the ball. Maybe if there wasn't a runner at first already or the ball gets away from the catcher, then maybe he would get second base. The way I read the play, I give the DDB signal, see if the runner makes it to first, wait for the play to end. If ended like you said with a runner out at home, runner out, batter at first where he would have been without the obstruction, play ball.

This play has worried the sh*t out of me all day. Granted this was a FED question, but we have mixed in some OBR in our discussion. My thoughts all day have been "how can it be logical to wipe out an out at the plate on an outstanding throw by RFielder with bases loaded because the batter was obstructed going to 1B, in either FED or OBR?" The obstruction had nothing to do with the throw to the plate. This has never come up in any games I have done, or seen, so this is all new to me, and very interesting. Prior to reading all this commentary I am sure I would have called an out at the plate (if I were the PU), and awarded 1B to batter (if I were the BU). I believe, whether right or wrong, if this were the ruling there would be no arguments from anyone.

DG - read 7.06(a). On type A obstruction, which includes obstruction on the batter before reaching first base, the ball is dead immediately. If the play at the plate happens after the obstruction, it happens, by rule, with a dead ball.

--Rich

I'm not sure I can deduce from the original post that the obstruction happened after the obstruction. Sounded like it was the other way around. Anyway, I think 7.06a is talking about obstruction when a play is being made on the obstructed runner, and 7.06b is talking about obstruction on a runner who is not being played on. But both say that we should advance runners to the bases they would have reached had the obstruction not occured and since the runner from 3rd was thrown out, and the obstruction had nothing to do with him then the out should stand and the batter goes to 1B, unless we think he could have made 2B, which I don't see that happening.

The play at the plate happened literally seconds after the B/R was knocked down.

We had three officials on the field and all of us agreed that the out at home should be negated because it was after the delayed dead ball and the defense made no attempt to put out the man at first.

I still don't understand why you would have negated the out at home.

Its a delayed dead ball which means the ball is alive until the play if over. Once the play is over, BR is on first, the base he would have reached so you have no need to enforce obstruction.

Even then, in enforcing obstruction, it only affects those who are forced to advance because of the award to the obstructed runner.

The runner at home was on his own.

Thanks
David

Because the rules say so. 7.06a.

Giving him 2nd was wrong though.

Did you read any of this thread?

That is exactly what has been discussed, Federation rules, the out stands.

No 7.06a in FED ball rules
 

This is HS ball FED rules.

Thanks
David

Here is my answer: I agree with David B but I will cite the appropriate FED rules that apply.

Resume play with bases loaded and one out.

In my opinion the obstructed runner reached the base I thought he would therefore obstruction is ignores since it did not affect the other runner. Any play on them stands therefore runner is out at home. NO OPTIONS GIVEN TO COACH IN THIS SITUATION.

The question now is to sort out the play and determine if the play stands or I must make an award for the obstruction.

It has already been established that Batter-runner was obstucted (Fed 2.22.1). Obstruction is a delayed dead ball situation (Fed 5.1.2b). When all pay has stopped the umpire shall call time and the ball becomes dead (Fed 5.1.3)


Letting the play stand speaks for itself. (This is my answer and reasons follow).

DownTownTonyBrowne mentioned the two FED rules that may apply to this situation. FED 8.1.1e and FED 8.3.2.

Which applies can be know through some general logic.

Rule 8.1 covers the situation in which the BATTER becomes a baserunner. Fed 8.1.1e says that the BATTER BECOMES A RUNNER when the catcher or any other defensive player obstructs him. What that is saying is he was obstructed as a BATTER and because of such became a baserunner.

Is that why the batter was running on the play in question? NO. He was running because he hit a fair ball (FED 8.1.1a) Therefore, FED 8.3.2 applies.

...the umpire shall award the obstructed runner and each other runner affected by the obstruction the bases they would have reached, IN HIS OPINION, had there been no obstruction.

In this play the obstruction did not hinder any other runner other than the batter-baserunner. In my opinion, given the shallow hit the batter would not have reached any base beyond 1st and when time was called he was AT first.
Since no other runners were affected by the obstruction whatever had happened to them at the point time was called stands.

IN MY OPINION, if this happened in my game since the obstructed runner reached the base I thought he would have reached, then the obstruction is ignored. The out at the plate stands and we resume play with bases loaded and 1 out.

Of course I would have to explain to coach and if the same behavior happened as in the original post then there would have been 3 ejections; The coach, the catcher, and the on-deck batter.









[Edited by Daryl H. Long on May 23rd, 2004 at 10:59 PM]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WindyCityBlue
[B]Here is the insane High School play of the day...

Bases loaded...no outs...the batter hits a Texas leaguer into short right field. The right fielder comes charging in, the first and second basemen busting out...they converge and the ball falls to the ground. The right fielder scoops it up and fires a strike to the catcher in front of the dish. He tags the runner from third prior to him reaching the plate.

You with me so far? As the ball was in the air, the pitcher, WATCHING THE BALL NOT WHERE HE WAS GOING, heads to first to cover the unoccupied base. Only, he sideswipes the B/R before he gets there and knocks him down. Obstruction is called, and since the ball was being held by the catcher, “Time” was called. The B/R was awarded second base on the obstruction, pushing home TWO RUNS. That’s correct, the out at the plate was nullified and the runners on second and third were scored because of the award.

The defensive head coach goes nuts and winds up getting tossed during the explanation. The next batter is in his on deck circle and starts laughing. The catcher walks over to him and they get into it. The catcher gets dumped when he pushes the on deck batter down.
Calm is restored and the game goes eleven innings before the team that benefited from the obstruction wins on a passed ball.

What do you think of the rulings?

The responses regarding OBR rules have no bearing since this is a high school game using Fed rules.

Seems like things developed quickly after F9 fielded the ball and threw home. In this high school game I would have killed the play upon F1's contact with the batter runner before the BR reached first base. Since the out at the plate had nothing to do with the obstruction I have one out.
With the catcher holding the ball, in my judgment the other runners would not have advanced further than the next base.

I now have no run scored and one out, bases loaded with the assistant coach at the helm for the defense as well as a new catcher.

Michael