Microphones for umpires?

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

(7) J/R says, on obstruction without a play, even though the ball does not become immediately dead..."the ball becomes dead if a fielder possesses the ball and actually tags the protected runner, or forces him into a rundown..." That is what happened in this play...however, U2 did not call time, but rather he called R1 "out". This is where they caused a lot of confusion.

Lawump,

Doesn't this mean that U2 should have called "Time" as soon as the rundown with R1 began, when R2 was 2/3 of the way to third base? Why would he need to wait until a tag was applied, since the obstructed runner was now being played upon in a rundown?

That's Roder's take anyway. The MLBUM says that time is to be called as soon as a previously obstructed runner is tagged out.


Tim.

[lawump]

R1 never got in a rundown between second and third. The throw from the outfield went to the fielder located right next to the first base bag. The fielder after catching the throw from the outfield on one hop, looked up and saw R1 trying to scramble back to second base. R1 fired to the middle infielder at second, and the tag was applied as R1 was diving head first back into second. R1 was then called out.

IMO, at the moment of the tag, U2 should have called "time".

[lawump]

SDS,

Sorry about the weekend.

--Red Sox fan.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Lawump, you're right. I forgot that there was no rundown.

But if there had been, then according to J/R, at what point of the rundown do you kill the ball? Do you wait until the second fielder touches the ball, or what?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by lawump

SDS,

Sorry about the weekend.

--Red Sox fan.

It's ok with me. I like the Red Sox. They are my favorite AL East team. I hate the Yankees.

Besides, we lost 2-1, then waxed your butts in game 2, then lost in a good pitching matchup yesterday. It wasn't like the Padres rolled over for the Sox, they were all good games.

[lawump]

Very true. I just like to tease. With the Sox you know you have to brag during the FIRST half of the season...because you know what's coming during the second half!

[lawump]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Lawump, you're right. I forgot that there was no rundown.

But if there had been, then according to J/R, at what point of the rundown do you kill the ball? Do you wait until the second fielder touches the ball, or what?

First question: Because J/R considers a rundown as being a "play"...the umpire shall kill the ball immediately upon the commencement of the rundown in your hypo.

Second question: Not necessarily. If the first fielder caught the ball and saw R1 hung-up between the bases, and R1 just stands there between the bases waiting to see what the fielder does, and the fielder (instead of throwing to another fielder) starts running at R1...then I'd call "time" and award appropriately.

[lawump]

Originally Posted by SAump

I understand that R1 was protected at 2B because of OBS and that R2 was safe at 3B at the TOO. But where was the BR at the TOO? Ten small steps away from 2B. I also have obstruction on the play, but I would like to know how I can protect BR. Would anyone care to explain to me why the BR is protected all the way back to 1B when the BR is not protected by obstruction and he made a huge BR mistake?

Because in Type "B" obstruction, at the moment a "play" is made on the obstructed runner...the ball is dead. Here, R1 is protected back into second. The defense, upon getting the ball back into the infield, imediately made a play on R1 diving back into second. At the time of the tag, the ball is "dead" IF the umpires are protecting R1's return to second. (If they are not protecting it, then the ball remains "live" and R1 would have been out or safe just like a normal play). Because the ball is dead at the time of the tag attempt on R1, the B/R has to go back to first. The B/R cannot be put out because the ball is "dead".

Yesterday, after the fact and a crew huddle, the umpires decided to protect R1 back into second. Thus, they determined that at the moment the tag was applied the ball should have been killed. Thus, they decided that everything that happened after that point, shouldn't have been allowed to occur. SO, they "un-did" it.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by SAump

I understand that R1 was protected at 2B because of OBS and that R2 was safe at 3B at the TOO. But where was the BR at the TOO? Ten small steps away from 2B. I also have obstruction on the play, but I would like to know how I can protect BR. Would anyone care to explain to me why the BR is protected all the way back to 1B when the BR is not protected by obstruction and he made a huge BR mistake?

Because the play was really over before the BR was tagged out. He was tagged after the play on R1, which made everything after that moot. Or mute if your so inclined.

[Dave Reed]

Getting back to the question of microphones, in Japan the plate umpire has access to a microphone which is behind a small door in the backstop. He can make comments to the crowd and television/radio audiences. It is used sparingly--my sister-in-law is a Tokyo Giants fan, and she says it comes out once or twice per season.

I saw the microphone once while I was in Japan. It was occaisioned by an apparent error by the crew in handling a ground rules situation. Parks in Japan are all very similar, with similar ground rules, and the fans tend to know them. The announcement was simply that due to repairs, the usual ground rules were changed for that week's games. I thnk this is a fine use of a microphone-- the umpire is clarifying something that even very knowledgeable fans could not have known.

Since the 'phone is available all the time and is seldom used, I think it is a fair inference that Japanese baseball does not favor routine use.

[Jim Porter]

Originally Posted by tibear

Can't tell exactly when the obstruction took place but we know it happened right at second base and by the time the ball gets to the infield R1 is at least halfway to third. R1 then realizes that R2 is standing on third and tries to retreat to second and is tagged out.

The play on R1 wasn't immediately after the obstruction and didn't ultimately prevent him from gaining access to the base to which he was obstructed(3rd). He was tagged out going back to a base to which he wasn't obstructed (2nd).

How can the umpires say that the obstruction prevented R1 from getting back to second? R1 made the decision to continue on towards third base after the obstruction call without looking to see what R2 was doing and as a result got caught too far off the base to get back in time. If anything the obstruction prevented the runner from getting even further away from second and made the tag at second closer then it should have been!

Lawump, I agree with your analysis of what took place on the call and that the umpires determined the obstruction prevented R1 from getting back to second but I'm just not buying it.

All I see is bad baserunning.

R1 was obstructed as he rounded 2nd. At that moment, the umpires must decide where to protect him. He will either be protected to 3rd or back to 2nd. Since R2 stopped at 3rd, the only place to protect R1 was back to 2nd.

R1 did indeed continue toward 3rd before he began his retreat. He was thrown out sliding back into 2nd. Without the obstruction, R1 would have made it back to 2nd safely. The time he lost due to the obstruction directly led to the defense's ability to put him out sliding back into 2nd.

[Jim Porter]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Lawump, you're right. I forgot that there was no rundown.

That was my fault. So much happened during that play that my memory invented a rundown with R1.

[TussAgee11]

2 points of clarification I wish to get insight on.

1) I still don't understand how the obstruction allowed R1 to get back to second quicker. If there is no obstruction, he makes it farther towards 3rd base, which puts him in even more of a rundown, as 3rd was occupied by R2. To me, negating the obstruction makes R1 even MORE out in that run down. How did F6 slowing R1s ADVANCE obstruct R1s RETREAT towards 2nd?

2) MLB rule 7.06 reads "The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out." Now it seems as though R1 had legally touched 2nd, and therefore, should be awarded third. All preceding runners (which would be R2?) would advance if forced (R2 to home, because of force, correct?).

Is this just an OBR error? If so, how should the rule read (or at least its interpretation...)

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

2 points of clarification I wish to get insight on.

1) I still don't understand how the obstruction allowed R1 to get back to second quicker. If there is no obstruction, he makes it farther towards 3rd base, which puts him in even more of a rundown, as 3rd was occupied by R2. To me, negating the obstruction makes R1 even MORE out in that run down. How did F6 slowing R1s ADVANCE obstruct R1s RETREAT towards 2nd?

2) MLB rule 7.06 reads "The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out." Now it seems as though R1 had legally touched 2nd, and therefore, should be awarded third. All preceding runners (which would be R2?) would advance if forced (R2 to home, because of force, correct?).

Is this just an OBR error? If so, how should the rule read (or at least its interpretation...)

You're looking at 7.06(a). You need to look at 7.06(b).

Tim.

[Jim Porter]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

2 points of clarification I wish to get insight on.

1) I still don't understand how the obstruction allowed R1 to get back to second quicker. If there is no obstruction, he makes it farther towards 3rd base, which puts him in even more of a rundown, as 3rd was occupied by R2. To me, negating the obstruction makes R1 even MORE out in that run down. How did F6 slowing R1s ADVANCE obstruct R1s RETREAT towards 2nd?

2) MLB rule 7.06 reads "The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out." Now it seems as though R1 had legally touched 2nd, and therefore, should be awarded third. All preceding runners (which would be R2?) would advance if forced (R2 to home, because of force, correct?).

Is this just an OBR error? If so, how should the rule read (or at least its interpretation...)

1) The runner lost a step on the obstruction, and was out by a step trying to retreat. But that's beside the point. In Type B obstruction, the umpire must decide where to protect the runner. The only logical place to protect R1 was back to 2nd. If R1 had somehow advanced to 3rd base then he would no longer have been protected.

2) You're looking at 7.06(a), or Type A obstruction. You need to look at 7.06(B) -- Type B obstruction:

7.06(b) If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall then call “Time” and impose such penalties, if any, as in his judgment will nullify the act of obstruction.
Rule 7.06(b) Comment: Under 7.06(b) when the ball is not dead on obstruction and an obstructed runner advances beyond the base which, in the umpire’s judgment, he would have been awarded because of being obstructed, he does so at his own peril and may be tagged out. This is a judgment call.