Catcher's Obstruction with Malicious Contact - Did we get it right?

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by scarolinablue

However, in FED, since malicious contact supercedes obstruction, [/I]

I think this statement prevents any runs from scoring due to R2 and R3 moving up one base because of the catcher's obstruction. When R1 was declared out for malicious contact, neither R2 nor R3 was forced to advance.

I would still award the batter-runner first base, but R2 and R3 will remain at the base they were occupying at the time of the malicious contact.