How to prevent double calls

[umpduck11]

1) I don't make an out call on an obstructed runner, therefore there's no need to reverse the call. Why would you call an out if you know the runner's
been obstructed ?

2) Knowing which bases are which umpire's responsibility will keep this from
happening every time. It's something I go over in pre-game. No need for any
"secret" signs either. If the player appeals to my partner and it's my call, I
will call out "Bill, I've got this", that way the teams knows it's my call, not my partners.

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by umpduck11

1) Why would you call an out if you know the runner's been obstructed ?

I'm implying that you DON'T know that the runner has been obstructed in the first situation - especially in this situation given since you have fair/foul and catch/no catch in right field

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bossman72

I'm implying that you DON'T know that the runner has been obstructed in the first situation - especially in this situation given since you have fair/foul and catch/no catch in right field

Then make the call and let your partner come in and say, "Boss -- I had obstruction. That runner scores."

It's no big deal, especially if your partner has pointed and called the obstruction when it occurred.

[canablue05]

The base umpire should be declaring obstruction loud enough for people to hear. I can see how this might be a problem in a sold out park where crowd noise could be an issue...in this case call time, communicate with your partner what you have, and then get the call right.

[DG]

As PU:

1) If the obstruction call was mine to make I can generally refrain from calling an out. If the call was my partner's then I may not know about it and will make the call at the plate that I see and we will sort it out later.

2) I normally take touches of 3b, and 1B if my partner goes out on a play in the outfield, and this will be covered in pre-game, so I don't think we will be making opposite calls. If we do, my call stands for the ones I am responsible for. Coach might not like it, but he can get over it, because he knows down deep whose call it is.

[TussAgee11]

1) I'm PU. I make my call. Even if I know the obstruction occured (unless its an auto award, which happened in the WS this year. PU made no call and just pointed at the plate scoring the runner)

2) I know which bases are mine and which aren't. Still, sometimes when the manager is calling out to appeal a certain base, its not bad to look at your partner and give a discrete point by your pant leg, or a discrete pat of the chest. But there should be no confusion anyway, I know my bases and you should know yours.

[LakeErieUmp]

Like TussAgee and Bob said, this is not a "double call". You're making the call as PU that you're supposed to make. Then your BU provides the obstruction piece that provides the award.

[tiger49]

Originally Posted by canablue05

The base umpire should be declaring obstruction loud enough for people to hear. I can see how this might be a problem in a sold out park where crowd noise could be an issue...in this case call time, communicate with your partner what you have, and then get the call right.

According to Baseball Canada Rule Interpretation #4 the ball becomes dead the moment there is a play being made on an obstructed runner. Now I hope at a National my partners would loudly call the obstruction as well as point to the obstuction, so that we don't look like idiots with running in saying he had obstruction as I am pounding him out.

[PWL]

I don't know if anyone remembers this play from the AL playoff a few years back. Miguel Tejada of the A's was just reaching third when he was obstructed with by the Yankees third baseman. Instead of running hard all the way home, Tejada started running about half speed and pointing back at the obstruction. As I recall the PU gave the out signal as the tag was applied at the plate. The U3 made the obstruction call. Nobody seemed to get too worked up over that as the call was the correct call to make. However if the PU knew the runner was obstructed with, why was he making an out call?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by PWL

I don't know if anyone remembers this play from the AL playoff a few years back. Miguel Tejada of the A's was just reaching third when he was obstructed with by the Yankees third baseman. Instead of running hard all the way home, Tejada started running about half speed and pointing back at the obstruction. As I recall the PU gave the out signal as the tag was applied at the plate. The U3 made the obstruction call. Nobody seemed to get too worked up over that as the call was the correct call to make. However if the PU knew the runner was obstructed with, why was he making an out call?

Well, it's not the correct call to make if he saw U3's call. Perhaps the PU did not see the obstruction, and thus didn't know it had occurred. He was probably perfoming other duties like watching the ball, or watching a touch of the plate. Indeed, why would a MLB umpire call Tejada out if he saw U3 call obstruction?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by PWL

I don't know if anyone remembers this play from the AL playoff a few years back. Miguel Tejada of the A's was just reaching third when he was obstructed with by the Yankees third baseman. Instead of running hard all the way home, Tejada started running about half speed and pointing back at the obstruction. As I recall the PU gave the out signal as the tag was applied at the plate. The U3 made the obstruction call. Nobody seemed to get too worked up over that as the call was the correct call to make. However if the PU knew the runner was obstructed with, why was he making an out call?

It was Type B obstruction, and because Tejada jogged in the umpire judged that he would have been out even without the obstruction so the out call stood.