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

[johnnyg08]

well, if he successfully reaches 1B safely he wasn't really "obstructed" was he? w/o the OBS, you've pretty much got a double play...so if he successfully reaches 1B, minus the Malicious, what are you going to call? You'd still call the OBS, but ignore it becuase it didn't matter...the offense wasn't disadvantaged by the OBS...but I haven't seen a video clip...

[bossman72]

1) Catcher's Int. Normal rule (as it applies here): BR gets first and all runners return, unless forced. Defense gets option of the play or the penalty.

2) Malicious contact and Intentional INT on R1. Normal Rule: R1 out and ejected and BR out. Runners return.


If we truly penalized in the order in which they occur, then we have R1 out and ejected and the BR (awarded first on the CI, which was administered first) out for the intentional interference by R1. R2 and R3 return because of the interference of R1.

...although mbyron's interp just "feels" more right since BOTH penalties are more or less enforced.

I'm confused...

[dash_riprock]

In order for the obstruction to be ignored, the BR must reach 1st and all other runners must advance at least one base.

[soundedlikeastrike]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

In order for the obstruction to be ignored, the BR must reach 1st and all other runners must advance at least one base.

I think dash has tipped the ice berg;

I'll climb out on this limb and start sawing......

I have bases juiced, 1 out, and a run scored.

You can't reward the D when there's CI.

At the end of continous action, the call of "time" on the MC/INT; R1 did not reach his advance base unto which, he was forced. Nor did the BR reach 1B.

You don't get to pick and chose in this enforcement. It's over shouting your partner, "no, I have CI, BR to 1B and all runners forced to, do so, "not you bozo, (R1) your gone", coach, I need a sub for the ejected R1 now R2..

I have: BR @ 1st, R1 (now replaced with a sub after the ejection) @ 2nd, R2 to 3rd and R3 scores. The Defene is not "obligated" an out on CI, they might get one if O want's to give it up.

Offensive coach has the option of declining the "enforcement", and accepting the play, (maybe he's up 10 runs in the top of last inning, with rain moving in? No, no, that's okay blue, I want the innning ending DP. And he could, IMO, but then.., I have to forfeit him, as he is palpably speeding up the game...skip that part..

From OBR, 6.08: Batter is awarded 1B if;

(c) The catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to "decline the interference penalty" and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. "However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, "and" all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference.

[mbyron]

I'm sorry, that's incorrect. Catcher's obstruction is a delayed dead ball, and the ensuing playing action counts and must be factored in. The INT by R1 kills the play.

At that point, the two options are:
1. R1 out (and ejected for MC) AND BR out on the INT, inning over; or
2. BR awarded 1B on the OBS, R1 out (and ejected for MC) and other runners return on the INT.

You don't skip the out on R1 just because he's ejected. The out is for INT, the ejection is for MC. These penalties are not part of the choice that comes with the OBS penalty.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I'm sorry, that's incorrect. Catcher's obstruction is a delayed dead ball, and the ensuing playing action counts and must be factored in. The INT by R1 kills the play.

At that point, the two options are:
1. R1 out (and ejected for MC) AND BR out on the INT, inning over; or
2. BR awarded 1B on the OBS, R1 out (and ejected for MC) and other runners return on the INT.

You don't skip the out on R1 just because he's ejected. The out is for INT, the ejection is for MC. These penalties are not part of the choice that comes with the OBS penalty.

You'd "skip" the out on R1 if it was for "normal" interference. The result of that play would be bases loaded and a run in.

IMO, the fact that it's malicious changes the play, and the ruling.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

You'd "skip" the out on R1 if it was for "normal" interference. The result of that play would be bases loaded and a run in.

IMO, the fact that it's malicious changes the play, and the ruling.

Bob, what's your citation for this ruling? I've been taught to penalize offenses in the order in which they were committed. I don't pass on (normal) INT because of a prior catcher's obstruction.

Without the malicious contact, I still have R1 out, R2 and R3 return on the INT, and BR awarded 1B on the OBS.

Edited to add: the only case play my cursory search turns up with both OBS and INT penalizes both, and it explicitly articulates the principle of penalizing the infractions in the order in which they occur (usually OBS then INT, since INT generally kills the play). See 8.3.2H.

[PeteBooth]

You enforce the penalties in order of occurance. There is FED case play ( not on this very issue) involving both OBS and interference. If there was NO MC on this play you would "skip the interference"

IMO, the "Monkey Wrench" is the MC and I am leaning more towards Bob's ruling assuming R3 did not ALREADY score before R1 Maliciously contacted F4.

If the conditions under CI or CO are not met then you enforce the penalty.

Pete Booth

[johnnyg08]

I agree bossman, I have a hard time calling a willfull and deliberate interference...because the CI gives the offense the option in this case to accept the play or the runner at 1B...the MC had no effect on the double play because had the CI not occurred, the MC would've come into play...Yep, I'm on Mbyron's ruling here...but I like talking about this situation...it's not about who's right/wrong on here necessarily...we need to get to a situation where we all get this right on the field...keep 'em coming guys...although I think we have the correct sitch on here...

[johnnyg08]

true but technically here we have catcher's interference...which, I think portions of the OBS rule don't apply to the catcher's interference rule...

[DG]

I think the catcher obstruction happened first, so BR is awarded 1B, no chance for a DP involving BR. Interference kills the play and removes the force, R1 is out and ejected, runners return, no run scores. 2 outs, 1 player tossed, bases still loaded.

Offense is not going to take result of the play instead of catcher obstruction, because the result should be a DP for maliciously interfering with a DP attempt.

Just a side note, I don't think I would have a discussion with my partner 15-20 feet from 2 coaches who are head to head in such a volatile situation. They must each go their own dugout or very near it and then my partner and I will discuss.