CLE @ CIN 5-24, Obstruction?

[jwwashburn]

And again...Drake got rid of his Mullet ...let's give him some support! I don't want him to fall off the wagon.

Joe in Missouri

[kylejt]

Even if it was obstruction, it was only type b, since the ball had long since left the area. So you're only going to make up for what was lost by the obstruction, which was absolutely nothing. The runner didn't lose a step, nor vary his path.

I'm okay with him calling it(not really, but...), but not for them to change their call based on it.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by kylejt

Even if it was obstruction, it was only type b, since the ball had long since left the area. So you're only going to make up for what was lost by the obstruction, which was absolutely nothing. The runner didn't lose a step, nor vary his path.

I'm okay with him calling it(not really, but...), but not for them to change their call based on it.

If losing a run is nothing...then...

[UmpJM]

johnny,

In order for the defense to be "making a play" on a runner, some member of the defense must have possession of the ball or a throw must be on the way in an attempt to retire the runner.

Since the defense was "chasing after a loose ball" at the time the obstruction alledgely occurred, it had to be Type B.

JM

[johnnyg08]

got it...thx. I mixed up this play w/ a different video being discussed. I stand corrected...thx for pointing that out.