Obstruction and coach's interference video

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bossman72

Bobby, i'm going to have to agree with Oz and JM on this play. INT, the majority of the time will supersede an OBS award.

Hey, what am I, chopped liver?

It's not actually a case of "superseding," since you can enforce both. I would use the concept of "superseding" only where it was not possible to enforce both penalties, so one had to choose which to enforce.

[NFump]

Under the obstruction rule don't you "nullify" the act of obstruction. Without the obstruction there would have been no interference. Send'em to second.

[ozzy6900]

While I agree that this was a nasty situation, all I can say is:

Come on guy's, it's OBR! You take it step by step.

• Type B obstruction with BR- delayed award. (notice I did not say delayed dead ball)
• Coach's Interference on the BR
• 2nd base award to BR for the obstruction
• Call BR out for Coach's Interference
• Eject personnel as needed.

I think that Bobbybanaduck and his crew did a good job on this one. A tip of the hat to you and your crew.

Regards

[bobbybanaduck]

i've been deer in headlights on this one cuz there was NO OBSTRUCTION called on the play, which is why Jacobs was called out on the play after the discussion. after reading the posts i made a call last night and talked about this with a AAA guy. what we came up with is pretty much what was posted somewhere above, so i will edit my playing god statement to correct it, and say that this would be one of the times you could play god.

if, in the discussion after the play, we had decided that there WAS obstruction on this play, then Jacobs would have been awarded 2B and the coach's assist would have been disregarded as the OBS would have taken precedence. the discussion on the phone last night pretty much culminated in the fact that because the ball went to the backstop and Jacobs was going hard with intent to go to 2B, he would be sent there as the fix to the OBS, and the coach's assist wouldn't have mattered cuz he should have already been at 2B.

thanks for keeping me in check.

http://s240.photobucket.com/albums/f..._Stream001.flv

edited to add the link in again cuz it's a new page...

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck

i've been deer in headlights on this one cuz there was NO OBSTRUCTION called on the play, which is why Jacobs was called out on the play after the discussion. after reading the posts i made a call last night and talked about this with a AAA guy. what we came up with is pretty much what was posted somewhere above, so i will edit my playing god statement to correct it, and say that this would be one of the times you could play god.

if, in the discussion after the play, we had decided that there WAS obstruction on this play, then Jacobs would have been awarded 2B and the coach's assist would have been disregarded as the OBS would have taken precedence. the discussion on the phone last night pretty much culminated in the fact that because the ball went to the backstop and Jacobs was going hard with intent to go to 2B, he would be sent there as the fix to the OBS, and the coach's assist wouldn't have mattered cuz he should have already been at 2B.

thanks for keeping me in check.

http://s240.photobucket.com/albums/f..._Stream001.flv

edited to add the link in again cuz it's a new page...

So, if there's obstruction and you protect the runner to third, and he misses second base not as a direct result of the obstruction, is the runner liable to be put out on appeal?

If he is responsible for running the bases correctly (and he is), why does the obstruction in the original play excuse the coach's interference at first base?

[bobbybanaduck]

that's what my original thinking was before talking it out last night. his point was that the runner stopped running due to being obstructed and went back to 1B. if e hadn't been obstructed, he would have kept going and there would never have been an opportunity for the int. therefore, at the conclusion of the play, he would have awarded the runner such to make it so that the obstruction was rectified, sending him to 2B. i'm going to send him the video and see what he has to say about it. it may take awhile, but i'll post when he gets back to me.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck

that's what my original thinking was before talking it out last night. his point was that the runner stopped running due to being obstructed and went back to 1B. if e hadn't been obstructed, he would have kept going and there would never have been an opportunity for the int. therefore, at the conclusion of the play, he would have awarded the runner such to make it so that the obstruction was rectified, sending him to 2B. i'm going to send him the video and see what he has to say about it. it may take awhile, but i'll post when he gets back to me.

Convoluted reasoning. The ball was live as it was type B obstruction.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck

that's what my original thinking was before talking it out last night. his point was that the runner stopped running due to being obstructed and went back to 1B. if e hadn't been obstructed, he would have kept going and there would never have been an opportunity for the int. therefore, at the conclusion of the play, he would have awarded the runner such to make it so that the obstruction was rectified, sending him to 2B. i'm going to send him the video and see what he has to say about it. it may take awhile, but i'll post when he gets back to me.

I see your point.

But I still agree with JM, who said above that, even though protected, the runner still must run the bases legally.

Although without the OBS the coach would not have had the opportunity to interfere, the fact is that he DID interfere during a live ball. If the runner had committed interference after the OBS, he still would have been liable to be called out.

I'll be interested to hear what the AAA guy says.

[David Emerling]

I'm wondering if anybody would have a different ruling on this play depending on the system of rules.

In other words, would your ruling be any different under OBR, FED, or NCAA? Or, would your ruling apply to all three?

By the way, a great video. Very instructive.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN