I just came across this quiz a few minutes ago. http://www.rulesofbaseball.com/quiz1.html

It is made by http://www.rulesofbaseball.com/, but I think they have a few answers wrong.

One question really stood out to me. In it F1 stumbles and ends up falling, he ends up lying on top of first base. The BR is running down the line. He steps on F1's back, because F1 is totaly covering the base. BR falls on the ground. F2 picks up the ball and tags BR. It said that BR is out on appeal for missing first. Now mabye I'm missing something, but how is that not obstruction?

I can only guess that there was no play being made on BR, therefore no obstruction. If no play was being made on him he should have been able to stop and touch the bag, even if he waited for F1 to get off the bag.

The play was being made on the runner. The fielder was in the act of fielding the throw. Just because he missed it doesn't mean he wasn't in the act. Therefore no obstruction.

Good test. It was obviously made up by people who know the nuances of the game, and the explanations are detailed and intelligent.

I missed #10, which I thought was easy. I had no idea the manager actually had to <i>request</i> that the result of the play stand after catcher's interference.

The one where with 2 out the forced runner slides past 2B, missing the bag, and is tagged out after the run scores is still troublesome, even though I knew the answer. Seems as if the defense should be allowed a subsequent appeal to negate the run, but apparently they're not.

Try reading OBR 7.10(d), extended to all bases. If the runner stays in the immediate area of the base an appeal is not allowed, EVER. G