Obstruction - what's your mechanic?

[David Emerling]

OBR. You're the PU.

Situation: R2, two outs.

Play: Base hit into left-center field. R2 is obstructed by F6. BU calls the obstruction causing R2 to loose a step or two. Nonetheless, R2 attempts to score. The throw to the plate is a good one, and R2 is tagged out by a fairly close, yet certain, margin. He was clearly out. On the throw to the plate, the batter-runner decides to advance to 2nd.

Problem areas:

Do you signal R2 out at the plate? Even though the BU called the obstruction, how can you be sure to which base R2 is protected? Was it only 3rd? Was it home? Isn't this determination the sole province of the umpire who makes the original obstruction call?

Let's say you call R2 out at the plate. That's 3 outs. What if the catcher still had a play on the BR at 2nd? He doesn't make the throw because he heard the umpire call the out and he knows that is three outs. The inning is over. Can the umpires now get together and decide that R2 is awarded home? If so, how do you handle the defense argument ... "Hell, our catcher would have thrown down to 2nd to retire the batter! He had a good chance of getting that runner. To be fair, shouldn't you send the batter back to first? You can't pull the rug out from under us like that! Are we supposed to be mind readers? Hell, if we knew you were going to award him home, we would've cut the throw off."

I'm curious as to some of your views as to the mechanics and procedures for unraveling this problem.

Personally, I feel the PU needs to call the play exactly as he sees it. Safe or out, whatever the case may be. Now what? I don't see how the PU would have any other choice.

UNLESS ... you're of the view that the PU has the authority to throw his hands into the air when he observes R2 thrown out - awarding him home on the basis of his partner's obstruction call.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN


[Edited by David Emerling on Oct 24th, 2004 at 11:12 AM]

[Kaliix]

Good question. I wasn't completely sure of the answer, so I pulled out J/R.

According to J/R, this situation is a delayed dead ball as there is no play being made on the runner at the time. The umpire should immediately upon signalling obstruction, determine what base the runner will be protected to. The ball becomes dead if a fielder possesses the ball and actually tags the protected runner (to the base he was protected to).

So it would seem that the BU would call time upon the tag being made if he was protecting the runner home (likely). I would think that the BR would be put back on 1st.

[gordon30307]

Originally posted by David Emerling
OBR. You're the PU.

Situation: R2, two outs.

Play: Base hit into left-center field. R2 is obstructed by F6. BU calls the obstruction causing R2 to loose a step or two. Nonetheless, R2 attempts to score. The throw to the plate is a good one, and R2 is tagged out by a fairly close, yet certain, margin. He was clearly out. On the throw to the plate, the batter-runner decides to advance to 2nd.

Problem areas:

Do you signal R2 out at the plate? Even though R3 called the obstruction, how can you be sure to which base R2 is protected? Was it only 3rd? Was it home? Isn't this determination the sole province of the umpire who makes the original obstruction call?

Let's say you call R2 out at the plate. That's 3 outs. What if the catcher still had a play on the BR at 2nd? He doesn't make the throw because he heard the umpire call the out and he knows that is three outs. The inning is over. Can the umpires now get together and decide that R2 is awarded home? If so, how do you handle the defense argument ... "Hell, our catcher would have thrown down to 2nd to retire the batter! He had a good chance of getting that runner. To be fair, shouldn't you send the batter back to first? You can't pull the rug out from under us like that! Are we supposed to be mind readers? Hell, if we knew you were going to award him home, we would've cut the throw off."

I'm curious as to some of your views as to the mechanics and procedures for unraveling this problem.

Personally, I feel the PU needs to call the play exactly as he sees it. Safe or out, whatever the case may be. Now what? I don't see how the PU would have any other choice.

UNLESS ... you're of the view that the PU has the authority to throw his hands into the air when he observes R2 thrown out - awarding him home on the basis of his partner's obstruction call.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Concerning the protected base wouldn't it depend on where the obstruction occurred, how hard the ball was hit and the positioning of the outfielders? That aside if home is protected and BR makes it to second I would leave BR at second. On a play at the plate I think it's safe to assume BR would go for second. Can you assume a good throw and tag at second? Since defensive team caused the problem I don't think I would have much sympathy for the defensive team.

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by gordon30307 Concerning the protected base wouldn't it depend on where the obstruction occurred, how hard the ball was hit and the positioning of the outfielders?

I'm sure all those would be factors - yes. But WHO is going to make that decision? The BU, who called the obstruction? Or, can the PU also make this decision?

When the PU observes his partner call the obstruction, what is he to think - that the runner is protected to home? Can he assume that? That's something I would like an opinion on.

That aside if home is protected and BR makes it to second I would leave BR at second. On a play at the plate I think it's safe to assume BR would go for second. Can you assume a good throw and tag at second?

Oh, I don't know about that. I've seen many runners thrown out trying to advance on a throw to the plate. The catcher follows the play up with a throw down to 2nd. Why assume anything?

If you're going to make your determination on what you assume would've happened - are you suggesting that you would send the runner back if you thought that a throw might have retired the batter-runner?

Since defensive team caused the problem I don't think I would have much sympathy for the defensive team.

I agree with that. They can complain all they want about any seeming injustices, but the bottom line is that none of the issues would even be in play had their shortstop not obstructed R2.

But I don't think that is any excuse for the umpires not to have a standard way of handling this.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN



[Edited by David Emerling on Oct 24th, 2004 at 11:15 AM]

[cbfoulds]

A suggestion: [I have not had this sort of thing happen to me, so I can't say "this is what I do"]

The "book" mechanic for delayed-dead OBS is call & signal:
"That's obstruction!" - hold the left fist closed, out away from your side.

It would seem reasonable to me that, when the runner reaches the base to which you are protecting him, you drop the signal, i.e.: open your fist and drop the arm back to your side.

Thus, by taking a quick look at your partner, you can see what he is thinking about whether the runner is protected to "your" base: if he has his arms up calling "TIME!!", obviously he has the runner protected against the play at that base; if he still has the delay-dead signal on, he's just a slow, but the runner is still protected; if he has dropped the signal, the runner is beyond his protected advance and liable to be put out.

You ARE going to have to explain why the runner is out, since he was obstructed, but at least you won't have a "He's OUT!" "No, he's not, I've got Obstruction, with delayed-dead ball, he gets Home"; or worse - "Safe, he was obstructed between 2d & 3d" ... "Wait a minute partner, I only had him protected to 3d" .. "Oh, then I guess he's OUT."

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by cbfoulds
A suggestion: [I have not had this sort of thing happen to me, so I can't say "this is what I do"]

The "book" mechanic for delayed-dead OBS is call & signal:
"That's obstruction!" - hold the left fist closed, out away from your side.

I'm not aware of any "book" mechanic under OBR that has the umpire calling the obstruction using the prescribed FED mechanic.

The OBR mechanic is to point at the infraction and say, "That's obstruction!" ... and that's it.

But I think most umpires would understand the "left fist closed" signal.

* * *

I know when I call obstruction, I usually do not totally make up my mind as to how far I'm going to protect the runner until I see how continuing play unfolds.

For instance, in my example, if I were the BU, I would certainly protect the runner to 3rd but I may or may not protect him to the plate until I see how close the play ends up being. I'll use that as my measuring stick.

So, since the play was relatively close, I *would* protect him. But how would my partner know that? And, if my partner calls him out - how is the defense supposed to know to continue playing? Or should they be allowed to?

I think the answer might be this: As soon as the umpire who called the obstruction observes the runner being called out to a base to which he decided to protect him, he should immediately kill the play and award all other runners to whatever base they would have achieved. The standard for placing other runners is typically if they had advanced more than halfway, they are awarded the advanced base. If not, they return.

Should play be allowed to continue when an obstructed runner is put out prior to reaching an awarded base?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Edited by David Emerling on Oct 23rd, 2004 at 09:52 PM]

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by David Emerling
I think the answer might be this: As soon as the umpire who called the obstruction observes the runner being called out to a base to which he decided to protect him, he should immediately kill the play and award all other runners to whatever base they would have achieved.

That's it.

[Dave Reed]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

That's it.

Yet another example of very explicit language in the OBR which is not accepted by umpires today.

OBR 7.06(b) "If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible."

J/R is somewhat ambiguous, saying on the one hand "The ball becomes dead if a fielder posseses the ball and actually tags the runner..." but on the other hand says "an umpire can also impose time at the end of continous action if some runner has not been able to acquire (or return to) the base to which the umpire decided to protect him." They do offer an example which supports David's and Bob's answer.
I suppose the second quoted passage is meant to cover the situation in which the umpire who called obstruction doesn't observe the out call.

[Kaliix]

In all that I have read about obstruction, it is always the umpire who signaled obstruction in the first place that
1)determines what base the runner is protected to and that umpire may revise that award upon considering action that occured after the obstruction,
2)signals time (kills the play) when a play is being made on the obstructed runner at the base to which he is being protected to.

It seems that in Dave's example, it would be appropriate to protect the runner to home considering the closeness of the eventual play at home and the fact that the runner actually tried to advance to home even though he was obstructed.

If the BR would have successfully advanced to second on a throw home in which R2 was safe (ie. not obstructed), then he would likely be placed on second when the play is killed because of a play on R2 at his protected base.

J/R states that per MLB 6.21, the umpires are allowed to confer in deciding the award of bases when there is obstruction with no play.

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by Kaliix
If the BR would have successfully advanced to second on a throw home in which R2 was safe (ie. not obstructed), then he would likely be placed on second when the play is killed because of a play on R2 at his protected base.

I'm not sure I understand your parenthetical comment above ... (ie. not obstructed). Who was not obstructed? R2 was obstructed!

Let's say that the intent of the BU is to protect R2 at the plate - especially considering how close the play was.

But, let's change things slightly. Let's say R2 was actually safe on a very close play at the plate. Would play still remain live? Could F2 fire down to 2nd and retire the BR?

On the other hand, there seems to be a consensus that IF R2 is thrown out at the plate (to which he was protected), then the play would immediately be dead. No subsequent play could be made on the BR and he (the BR) would be placed on whatever base the umpires decide.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Rich]

Originally posted by cbfoulds
A suggestion: [I have not had this sort of thing happen to me, so I can't say "this is what I do"]

The "book" mechanic for delayed-dead OBS is call & signal:
"That's obstruction!" - hold the left fist closed, out away from your side.

It would seem reasonable to me that, when the runner reaches the base to which you are protecting him, you drop the signal, i.e.: open your fist and drop the arm back to your side.

Thus, by taking a quick look at your partner, you can see what he is thinking about whether the runner is protected to "your" base: if he has his arms up calling "TIME!!", obviously he has the runner protected against the play at that base; if he still has the delay-dead signal on, he's just a slow, but the runner is still protected; if he has dropped the signal, the runner is beyond his protected advance and liable to be put out.

You ARE going to have to explain why the runner is out, since he was obstructed, but at least you won't have a "He's OUT!" "No, he's not, I've got Obstruction, with delayed-dead ball, he gets Home"; or worse - "Safe, he was obstructed between 2d & 3d" ... "Wait a minute partner, I only had him protected to 3d" .. "Oh, then I guess he's OUT."

Nobody I know uses that fist out mechanic, even in high school games.

[Kaliix]

You said in your original play that R2 was out on a close play at home, but was obstructed by F6 on the way to third. If you, as the BU, are protecting R2 to home, you are doing so because you thought he would have made it home safely, if not for obstruction.

So, if the BR would have taken 2nd on the throw home, assuming there was no obstruction, then he would deserve 2nd if R2 was out at home on obstruction, because at that point you kill the play.

From the way I read it, I would think if R2 is safe at home, there is no need to kill the play, and you should let the continuing action play itself out.

But the last part is my interpretation and could be wrong?

Comments anyone?

Originally posted by David Emerling

I'm not sure I understand your parenthetical comment above ... (ie. not obstructed). Who was not obstructed? R2 was obstructed!

Let's say that the intent of the BU is to protect R2 at the plate - especially considering how close the play was.

But, let's change things slightly. Let's say R2 was actually safe on a very close play at the plate. Would play still remain live? Could F2 fire down to 2nd and retire the BR?

On the other hand, there seems to be a consensus that IF R2 is thrown out at the plate (to which he was protected), then the play would immediately be dead. No subsequent play could be made on the BR and he (the BR) would be placed on whatever base the umpires decide.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by Kaliix
You said in your original play that R2 was out on a close play at home, but was obstructed by F6 on the way to third. If you, as the BU, are protecting R2 to home, you are doing so because you thought he would have made it home safely, if not for obstruction.

So, if the BR would have taken 2nd on the throw home, assuming there was no obstruction, then he would deserve 2nd if R2 was out at home on obstruction, because at that point you kill the play.

From the way I read it, I would think if R2 is safe at home, there is no need to kill the play, and you should let the continuing action play itself out.

But the last part is my interpretation and could be wrong?

Comments anyone?

An umpire who calls obstruction can't always know, at the instant he makes the obstruction call, exactly how far he is going to protect that runner. He has to take a "wait and see" outlook on it. True?

For instance, when a batter hits the ball into the corner and, while rounding 1st, he is obstructed by F3, would an umpire immediately protect him to the plate? Unlikely. Yet, as the play unfolds and the batter is going for the inside-the-parker and is thrown out by a slim margin, the umpire could then decide to protect him to the plate ... something he was uncertain of while the play was still in its infancy.

The same can be said about the play in question. The BU calls the obstruction on F6 between 2nd and 3rd and doesn't necessarily make an immediate determination.

I don't see how the obstruction of R2 effects the BR. We really can't ask the question, "Would the BR had made second had it not been for the obstruction?" because it's completely unrelated to the obstruction. How could the fact that F6 obstructed R2 have any impact on the BR's attempt to reach 2nd on his hit?

I believe there are four possiblities. I would like to know if anybody has alternate solutions:

The BU decides to protect R2 to the plate:

1. R2 is thrown out and play is immediately killed. The out is overturned and the BR is placed to whatever base the the umpires feel is appropriate.

2. R2 is safe and play is allowed to continue. Whatever happens to the BR is allowed to take its natural course. If he's thrown out - he's out. If he's safe - he's safe.

The BU decides not to protect R2 to the plate:

3. R2 is thrown out at the plate. The out stands and play remains live.

4. R2 is safe and play is allowed to continue.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Kaliix]

Dave, I understand that you are trying to understand this but I think you are making it more difficult than it has to be.

In explaining 7.06(b) J/R states...
"When there is obstruction and no concurrent play on the obstructed runner (other than the BR before first base with a batter ball remaining in the infield), the ball remains live and the umpire must IMMEDIATELY (my emphasis) decide what base the runner would have acquired (or returned to safely) had the obstruction not occured. He then protects the runner to that base."

Furthermore, "An umpire may have to consider action occurring after obstruction in determining a runner's award or protection (or neither) An obstructed runner's protection or award can be revised each time something happens that would change the award or protection."

Your supposed to determine immediately what base you are protecting R2 to immediately upon obstruction. In reality, I would think, since you don't have to tell anyone, you can take a little time to figure it out as the play unfolds. The award can be revised if, for instance, a fielder falls, the ball gets by him, etc.

In referring to the BR getting second, I only meant that he should get second if the throw goes home and you have to kill the play, but you realize that R2 would have reached second regarless of what happened at the plate. If the BR just rounded 1st and watched the play at the plate and you had to kill the play because of obstruction, then I think the BR gets 1st since he wasn't taking 2nd on the throw.

If you only protect R2 to 3rd, then he advances at his own risk, past his protected base.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally posted by Kaliix
In explaining 7.06(b) J/R states...
"When there is obstruction and no concurrent play on the obstructed runner (other than the BR before first base with a batter ball remaining in the infield), the ball remains live and the umpire must IMMEDIATELY (my emphasis) decide what base the runner would have acquired (or returned to safely) had the obstruction not occured. He then protects the runner to that base."

Furthermore, "An umpire may have to consider action occurring after obstruction in determining a runner's award or protection (or neither) An obstructed runner's protection or award can be revised each time something happens that would change the award or protection."

I think the Jaksa Roder Manual over-emphasizes the "necessity" to decide on an obstructed runner's protection "immediately." For Type B obstruction, all that is really necessary at the moment of the obstruction is for the umpire to note the severity of the obstruction - i.e., what did he lose by being obstructed? A step? 5 steps? Then when a play is ultimately made on the runner, the decision to be made is, simply, did the obstruction impact the outcome of the play? If the runner was thrown out by 20 feet, then his being obstructed by a step or two did not materially affect the play, and the out would stand. Conversely, a runner put out on a pretty close play at an advance base should be given the benefit of the doubt and awarded that base due to the previously noted obstruction violation.

A legend-in-his-own-mind Internet umpire from awhile back used to make quite a fuss over this concept of immediately protecting a runner to a base, and that base was ALWAYS at least one base beyond the point of obstruction if he was legitimately advancing at the time of the obstruction because obstruction must always be penalized despite the specific wording of the rule that says it need only be "nullified," but you could always use "post obstruction evidence" to revise your protection if it became necessary. Yada yada yada. His theories on obstruction caught on with a few other big dogs of the boards (at the time) and who knows how many innocent readers were erroneously swayed to buy into those now discredited interpretations.

Correctly interpreting and applying the obstruction rules is an exercise in seeing a horse, not a zebra, and keeping things simple and in accord with the doctrine of common sense and fair play. While Jaksa/Roder is a valuable reference for many rule interpretations, a far better example of how to apply the obstruction rule can be found in the PBUC Manual, which contains this play and ruling:

Play: Batter-runner hits a fair ball down the right field line and is obstructed in rounding first base. At the moment the obstruction occurs, right fielder has not yet fielded the ball, and it appears at that moment that the batter-runner will end up with a stand-up double. However; as play proceeds, ball gets by the right fielder; and batter-runner continues on to third. Batter-runner is then thrown out at third base on a very close play.

Ruling: Since it is permissible for the umpire to consider the position of the runner; ball, and fielder at the moment the obstruction occurs, the umpire may initially plan on "protecting" the batter-runner as far as second base. However; as play continued, it became apparent that had the batter-runner not been obstructed in rounding first base, he would have reached third safely Therefore, the moment the batter-runner is tagged out at third base, "Time" is called and batterrunner is awarded third on the obstruction. This decision is made on the principle that the umpire, in making awards on this type of obstruction, shall allow play to continue until no further action is possible and then shall make awards-if any-that will nullify the obstruction. In this example, if the umpire felt that the obstruction had no bearing on the fact that the batterrunner was thrown out at third, the out would stand.