I believe that the "R on 2B" in this situation would be wise to "prove" the obstruction by leaving the base and creating contact with F6, in order to get this call. If he simply stays at 2B, it would be a tough call for the BU to adjudge that obstruction has occurred.

Originally Posted by fitump56
Obstruction has two intonations, 1) the obvious physical act and 2) the psychological act. In the second, the OBS still exists.

Example: R on 2B, a play is in progress in RF, he's standing on the bag, looking at the play. He mentally commits to attempt 3B but as he turns his head, F6 is standing directly in his path.

DEF needs to get out of the obvious basepath, or running line, and all is well. If they don't OBS should be considered.

Where's a video when you need one? :D Can't disagree but that is why they don't pay me the Big Bucks.

I've stayed out of this, but there are a few things in this thread that bear mentioning.

All codes but OBR have gone to "all obstruction is type B." In those codes, all play indeed does go until everything is completed and THEN the umpires place runners where they think they should go absent the obstruction. To stop the play would be, in essence, saying that type B becomes type A and that's simply not the case.

I treat OBR games exactly the same.

Saying that because R1 was put out by a step means that he would've been safe because the obstruction cost him a step is too simplistic in the case where more than one thing happens after the obstruction. No argument if R1 continued to third and was put out by a step there. No argument if R1 headed directly back to second and was put out by a step there. But R1 went to third, thought better of it, and tried to get back to second. Different story.

Then you're choosing to umpire OBR games with your own set of rules. You can argue the merits and logic of the rule...and whether it should be changed (as you implicitly did in the last paragraph of your post)...but to change it on your own by inserting your own (FED or NCAA) rule is something I have no respect for, unfortunately. Just so we're clear, I usually always respect your posts and positions...but not this one.

If one of my umpires (in my association that I'm President of) admitted to using OBR in a FED game or FED in an OBR game because he didn't like a particular rule or rule interpretation I'd come down pretty hard on him. I'm understanding of guys confusing one for the other during the heat of a game...but not understanding a rule is a totally different animal than intentionally ignoring a particular rule because of the umpire's particular view of the rule. You're doing a diservice to the league that retained your services, and your association's other umpires who, possibly, will have to explain to an irate coach why the same play got ruled on differently by different umpires.

And there is no wiggle room here, as you pointed out. Obstruction is a MAJOR difference between OBR and FED/NCAA. Treating an OBR "Type B" obstruction the same as you treat FED or NCAA obstruction is wrong. OBR requires the umpire to kill the ball when a play is being made on the protected runner.

And (it is not clear in your post) if you are treating OBR "Type A" obstruction as you would in FED (keep the ball "live")...if you are, then that's, IMO, even worse.

I don't like OBR OBS but I won't make a significant rule interp like this. :eek:

Once OBS occurs, then all things considered need to be in favor of the offense. If not, you are, in essence, protecting the rule violation by the defense. I bend over backwards to reward the offense and to penalize the dfense where judgment is allowed. I simply do not understand why the D doesn't get the hell out of the way.