Obstruction then Interference

[Armadillo_Blue]

R1 off with the pitch is obstructed by F3. B1 hits a grounder to F4 which hits R1 on his way to second. Umpire judges that R1 would not have been in the path of the ball had he not been obstructed. Is R1 still out for the interference.

Is the ruling the same in FED and OBR?

[johnnyg08]

my understanding is yes, r1 can still be out for interference because you call them in the order they occurred. minus the INT, if the runner is out trying to reach the base he would've reached had there been no obs...you enforce the obs at that time...

this is a good one, others will chime in.

[PeteBooth]

FED - Enforce the OBS because in FED the obstructed runner gets a minimum of a one base award and the OBS occured FIRST.

OBR - Depends

In OBR you have Type 'B" OBS so you ask yourself Absent the OBS which Penalty IF ANY are you going to award.

Therefore, if you as an umpire judge that absent the OBS the runner was going to be out anyway then enforce the interference.

Pete Booth

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Armadillo_Blue

R1 off with the pitch is obstructed by F3. B1 hits a grounder to F4 which hits R1 on his way to second. Umpire judges that R1 would not have been in the path of the ball had he not been obstructed. Is R1 still out for the interference.

Is the ruling the same in FED and OBR?

FED 2009 interp seems to imply that both infractions are penalized. So, I'd have R1 at second (on the OBS) and BR out (on the INT, since R1 can't be out).

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

FED 2009 interp seems to imply that both infractions are penalized. So, I'd have R1 at second (on the OBS) and BR out (on the INT, since R1 can't be out).

I like that call.

[PeteBooth]

The FED Interp:

SITUATION 15: With runners at first and second and one out, the batter hits a bounding ball to left field. The runner from second touches third and is obstructed advancing to home. The obstructed runner then interferes with the catcher attempting to make a play on the runner from first advancing to third base. RULING: The penalties are enforced in the order in which the infractions occurred. The runner advancing from second is awarded home. Following the enforcement for the obstruction, the interference is penalized. The runner from first is declared out and the batter-runner is returned to the base he legally occupied at the time of the interference. Had the interference been malicious in nature, the obstructed runner would be declared out in addition to the out on the runner from first. (2-22-1, 2-21-1a, 3-3-1n Penalty, 8-4-2e, 8-4-2g)

Pete Booth

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

FED 2009 interp seems to imply that both infractions are penalized. So, I'd have R1 at second (on the OBS) and BR out (on the INT, since R1 can't be out).

What if the fielder tripped the runner and the runner fell into the path of the batted ball?

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

What if the fielder tripped the runner and the runner fell into the path of the batted ball?

I'll take a shot:

Hmmm...obstruction. B/R gets 1B, other runners placed by umpire(s)...would have a tough time calling a runner out here.

[UmpTTS43]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

The FED Interp:

SITUATION 15: With runners at first and second and one out, the batter hits a bounding ball to left field. The runner from second touches third and is obstructed advancing to home. The obstructed runner then interferes with the catcher attempting to make a play on the runner from first advancing to third base. RULING: The penalties are enforced in the order in which the infractions occurred. The runner advancing from second is awarded home. Following the enforcement for the obstruction, the interference is penalized. The runner from first is declared out and the batter-runner is returned to the base he legally occupied at the time of the interference. Had the interference been malicious in nature, the obstructed runner would be declared out in addition to the out on the runner from first. (2-22-1, 2-21-1a, 3-3-1n Penalty, 8-4-2e, 8-4-2g)

Pete Booth

This interpretation makes absolutely no sense and, in my opinion, is totally assinine. Goodie for FED.

In NCAA, the interference supercedes the obstruction. I am pretty sure (could be wrong) the same for OBR with type B obs.

Let's have 2 outs when this sitch happens. I would love to have to explain to a coach that the runner that interfered is allowed to score, even though he interfered prior to scoring.

[Armadillo_Blue]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

The FED Interp:

SITUATION 15: With runners at first and second and one out, the batter hits a bounding ball to left field. The runner from second touches third and is obstructed advancing to home. The obstructed runner then interferes with the catcher attempting to make a play on the runner from first advancing to third base. RULING: The penalties are enforced in the order in which the infractions occurred. The runner advancing from second is awarded home. Following the enforcement for the obstruction, the interference is penalized. The runner from first is declared out and the batter-runner is returned to the base he legally occupied at the time of the interference. Had the interference been malicious in nature, the obstructed runner would be declared out in addition to the out on the runner from first. (2-22-1, 2-21-1a, 3-3-1n Penalty, 8-4-2e, 8-4-2g)

Pete Booth

But is this different because the runner at home has already scored? I know it doesn't specify in the case play, but if the runner interferes after crossing the plate then he cannot be called out so we call out the runner on whom they were playing.

In the OP the runner has not crossed home, but has interfered. Does the obstruction award give him a license to interfere? Is he not liable to be put out if he interferes even though we have awarded him a base. There are other scenarios in which bases are awarded but runners can still be called out.

I don't know the answers, but am trying to find a specific rule or interp or AO that answers this one way or the other.

I know we cannot make calls based on the coaches reactions, but I think calling the runner out would be a much easier sell than calling him safe even though he interfered while he was protected.

[DG]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

FED 2009 interp seems to imply that both infractions are penalized. So, I'd have R1 at second (on the OBS) and BR out (on the INT, since R1 can't be out).

In situation 15 this is not the same since BR was not being played on. If we follow FEDs logic runner from 2b scores because he was obstructed going home, runner from 1b is called out due to interference by the obstructed runner who interferes with catcher's attempt to retire runner from 1b, and BR gets 1B since he was not involved at all in the play.