Obstruction or interference

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by D-Man
Give us the answer already.

It's 37 degrees and murky here. I did plant my garlic, though. No baseball.

Did I say please? PPPLLEEEEAAASSSEEEE!?!

Listen carefully, my friend. I don't know the answer.

I'm going to wait a couple of days in the next week because some people don't post over the weekend.

Thanks for participating.

My thermometer says it's 86 now at 3:57 pm central standard time.

When it drops below 80, I put on long pants.
When it drops below 70, I put on a jacket.
When it drops below 60, I stay inside.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by PWL

Really no trick to it.

You still have to enforce the violations in the order that they occurred. Therefore, we have C. Nothing more, nothing less.

Why? Show me that rule in any book.

[GarthB]

My gut tells me it's "C". But it's lied to me before...like when it said, "Order the 20 oz porterhouse, you can eat it."

Runner advance beyond his award for the obstruction. He's not protected from his coach's stupidty at that point.

[largeone59]

Well i look at it this way:

When a batter hits a HR he is awarded 4 bases. If, let's say, that batter misses 3rd base and the 3rd base coach grabs him, and directs him backwards to retouch the base, we have an out, don't we?

I think the situation Carl gives us is no different.

My answer is C.


BobJenkins also has a very good answer.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by GarthB
Runner advance beyond his award for the obstruction. He's not protected from his coach's stupidty at that point.

Are you saying that the runner would be protected from his coach's stupidity had the umpire decided to award R2 home, instead of third on the obstruction?

[DG]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PWL
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

Originally posted by PWL
You still have to enforce the violations in the order that they occurred. Therefore, we have C. Nothing more, nothing less.

Not necessarily. There are several case plays where one offense is superseded by another that happened after the first. See 8.4.2 Situations T and and U for examples.

There are also a couple interesting case plays 3.2.2 Situation A and B. In A a coach assisting a runner is allowed because the runner is assisted during a dead ball award. In B a coach assisting a runner results in an out during a live ball.

None of this matters to the play in question. The runner is not awarded home (at least there is no evidence in the question to do so), and even if he were it's still a live ball and he needs to run the bases legally, without assistance from coach.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by largeone59
Well i look at it this way:

When a batter hits a HR he is awarded 4 bases. If, let's say, that batter misses 3rd base and the 3rd base coach grabs him, and directs him backwards to retouch the base, we have an out, don't we?

I think the situation Carl gives us is no different.

My answer is C.


BobJenkins also has a very good answer.

After a home run over the fence, you suggest that's an out. But it isn't in FED. Check out CB 3.2.2.

[D-Man]

Biggie, I like your thinking. Your interpretation is wrong (NFHSwise: See case 3.2.2, Sit. A) but if a batter-runner hits one that gets by a fielder into a corner for an apparent easy in-the-parker, trips over third base and is helped up by a coach, THEN he is out.

The coach has ruined the offense's chance at a potential award here. The order of things and the number of bases to nullify obstruction have no bearing here. The obstruction surely caused a trip (to the ground, not the mound) but had there been no interference by the coach, the obstruction could have been awarded. Instead, since the ball is delayed dead (thus, live when the interference occurred) the runner is still liable to be put out for some other reason. If put out by a fielder, the umpire would then have to judge where the runner would have been protected to. Since physical interference by a coach has a specific penalty, one that we must enforce if it occurs during a live ball, then we can still get the out.

Furthermore, my first post gave an answer that can't be correct. If the order of the infractions has no importance in this play, then (B.) cannot be a correct answer, even if one was to enforce the obstruction.

I now go with (C.).

[DG]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

After a home run over the fence, you suggest that's an out. But it isn't in FED. Check out CB 3.2.2.

This gets more interesting by the minute. In CB 3.2.2 Situation A the coach helped the runner to his feet while he was running the bases after a HR. Now if he were to grab the runner after he missed 3B and force him back to the base to tag is the coach allowed to provide this kind of assistance, vs. helping a runner to his feet who has already tagged the base? The coach could holler at him to return to tag, but can he grab him and make him tag?

Carl's case is different, since the ball is live.

I still have C though, obstruction awards 3B and coach interference causes the out.

[largeone59]

well i gotta say, this has to be one of the toughest "what if's" i've ever read on the internet.

I just think that the coach's interference is an automatic out- no matter if the runner was obstructed. Like bob said, you are still required to run the bases properly even if you are awarded bases.

[BigUmp56]

I would agree with that assesement for the most part. With that being said, *if* the runner tripped on the bag as a result of the obstruction, I still feel the runner should be avanced to at least third without regard to the interference.

I realize this is reading more into the play than what was initially presented, but in order to actually rule on this play, one would have to see it unfold to be sure.

At least that's how I see it.

Tim.

[DG]

Originally posted by largeone59
well i gotta say, this has to be one of the toughest "what if's" i've ever read on the internet.

I just think that the coach's interference is an automatic out- no matter if the runner was obstructed. Like bob said, you are still required to run the bases properly even if you are awarded bases.

I can't wait for Carl's result to come out, but I don't think it's that hard. Runner is awarded 3rd, or home if you feel benevolent, but the ball is live and he still has to run the bases legally. If we award him home, and he leaps over a standing catcher at home to reach the plate he is out, see case book plays referenced earlier. If he slides into the catcher illegally he should also be out, same reason. If his coach helps him to his feet... well you can see where I'm going. I think the coach's help is an out if it is a dead ball, the runner is awarded home, and the help in no way negates a failure to run the bases legally (I'm still on the fence on grabbing him and making him go back to tag a missed base).

Let me pose, along with this issue, a mechanics question. I know how I have always done it, and how I was taught and now I am looking in my different references to see if I'm doing it right. On a play like this (runner rounding 3B who is obstructed before reaching 3b), I have always signaled the obstruction and then made a mental note of the degree to which the obstruction hindered the runner and in my mind concluded that if he is thrown out on a close play at the plate he will be awarded home, but if it is not close he is out, or if the hindrance was not that severe then the award is 3B.

I recall a play in the Oakland Boston series in 2003 when a runner was called out between 3b and home after an obstruction call as he was advancing to 3b. The runner stopped running on his way to home, apparently thinking he was going to be awarded home, and I think if he had been called out on a close play a case could be made for awarding home, but since he stopped running he removed his chance for that ruling.

So my question, do you decide immediately what the award is, or let the play happen before you decide. Or, do you do like I do, decide to award if the play is close, but not if it is not (or if he stops running)?

[DG]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PWL
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by DG

Originally posted by PWL

If you are talking about malicious contact, illegal slide, hurdling, or jumping. Yeah, your right. But that is not the case here. I don't have a rule book or case book handy, so it is difficult for me to quote where to find things. I prefer to do it like this since I don't have them on the field. But, I did it just now to see if I could find anything. The best I could find in the FED case book is 8.3.2 Situation H. See if that helps

This helps in that it says we should rule on things in the order they occured, but as I mentioned, it is not necessarily always so. Some things supercede others, such as those you listed.

I love this discussion, but if I saw this exact case on the field I would say C is the answer. Every FED coach should know that obstruction is one base minimum, or more if the umpire decides the obstruction merits more. But every FED coach should also know that helping a runner to his feet is an OUT. I have learned herein that if it is during a dead ball award it is not an out.

In this case I think it is a short discussion with the coach, who will never help a runner to his feet again....ever, if he is smart.

[ManInBlue]

I have to agree with SDS and BU56. I believe R2 is going to be awarded home on the OBS, so I'm ignoring the INT by the coach.

Rules state the award is at least one base. It doesn't say it is only one base.

If this hit is into shallow left, then he's probably getting held up at third, not picked up and pushed home. He was obstructed, fell and still got home (or had the chance to get there). This tells me he should get the 2 base award. Ignore the INT by the coach.

We have to remember that in this case we award those bases we think he would have gotten. A little bit of the God rule in action.

JMO -

Thanks, SDS for mentioning this board again.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by ManInBlue
I have to agree with SDS and BU56. I believe R2 is going to be awarded home on the OBS, so I'm ignoring the INT by the coach.

Batter hits over the fence home run. BR misses third, and the coach grabs him by the back of the shirt and yanks him back to the base. No interference also?


*******************
I now realize that this example is incorrect, as the term "playing action" refers to only live ball situations.

[Edited by LDUB on Nov 28th, 2005 at 11:52 AM]