CLE @ CIN 5-24, Obstruction?

[Maz17]

Originally Posted by umpjong

OBR definition says you are wrong..

OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner

You must be able to state that the act impeded the progress of the runner.

(definition of impeded - made difficult or slow; )

Did this occur on this play, would he have been out if it had not occurred is the true question........

You are mistaken on your OBR application. He was not in posesion of the ball! Therefore, OBSTRUCTION. Also... all of this post can be cleared up by reading the MLB (or PBUC if you do not have one) Manual! This is obstruction! Sorry guys, but it is. There is no degree of obstruction. Full fledge or the slightest... its still obstruction.

And you are all right about showing Drake some support. The guy has been working his tail off since 99' with no contract or no pension plan! DRAKE... GOOD CALL!

[umpjong]

Originally Posted by Maz17

You are mistaken on your OBR application. He was not in posesion of the ball! Therefore, OBSTRUCTION. Also... all of this post can be cleared up by reading the MLB (or PBUC if you do not have one) Manual! This is obstruction! Sorry guys, but it is. There is no degree of obstruction. Full fledge or the slightest... its still obstruction.

And you are all right about showing Drake some support. The guy has been working his tail off since 99' with no contract or no pension plan! DRAKE... GOOD CALL!

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I will default with the written rule.
You didnt answer the question either.
How was the runners progress impeded?

[Maz17]

Originally Posted by umpjong

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I will default with the written rule.
You didnt answer the question either.
How was the runners progress impeded?

And yes... you are going with the rule written in section 2.00, but if you look up 7.06 types a and b, and also MLB Manual 6.20 and 6.23 You will see why Drake enforced his call.

I AM GONNA SHOUT THIS! MLB UMPIRES, AND THAT IS WHO WE ARE CRITICIZING ON THIS POST... DO NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT GO WITH THE OBR ALONE. You can direct all the comments you want at me and say how wrong I am and how a I don't know bull. But here is the long and short of it. I sent a email to a MLB ump who was assured by Mike Port (VP of umpiring) that the call was correct by Rob Drake. So... take that video and study it, if you want to enforce things like a MLB ump.

WELL DONE ROB DRAKE!

[umpjong]

Originally Posted by Maz17

And yes... you are going with the rule written in section 2.00, but if you look up 7.06 types a and b, and also MLB Manual 6.20 and 6.23 You will see why Drake enforced his call.

I AM GONNA SHOUT THIS! MLB UMPIRES, AND THAT IS WHO WE ARE CRITICIZING ON THIS POST... DO NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT GO WITH THE OBR ALONE. You can direct all the comments you want at me and say how wrong I am and how a I don't know bull. But here is the long and short of it. I sent a email to a MLB ump who was assured by Mike Port (VP of umpiring) that the call was correct by Rob Drake. So... take that video and study it, if you want to enforce things like a MLB ump.

WELL DONE ROB DRAKE!

This isnt about whether he is a major league umpire, it is about interpretation of the OBR rules. Some on this forum have stated that with the information given they would not have called obstruction. (this is of course is a judgment made by each of us on this forum)


You still have neglected to answer the question proposed to you.

How was the runners progress impeded? I feel that this question is pivotal in this scenario (as does OBR rules)

I would also ask you if you would adamantly state that the wrong call was made if no obstruction had been called on this particular play by this particular umpire. I feel by your posts that you would support his actions just because of who he is. (I hope I'm wrong)
I dont think anyone here doubts the fact that these guys are the best at this profession, but none of us are perfect and opining on calls like this only make us better.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Maz17

And yes... you are going with the rule written in section 2.00, but if you look up 7.06 types a and b, and also MLB Manual 6.20 and 6.23 You will see why Drake enforced his call.

I AM GONNA SHOUT THIS! MLB UMPIRES, AND THAT IS WHO WE ARE CRITICIZING ON THIS POST... DO NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT GO WITH THE OBR ALONE. You can direct all the comments you want at me and say how wrong I am and how a I don't know bull. But here is the long and short of it. I sent a email to a MLB ump who was assured by Mike Port (VP of umpiring) that the call was correct by Rob Drake. So... take that video and study it, if you want to enforce things like a MLB ump.

WELL DONE ROB DRAKE!

Somebody post a picture of the jockstrap, please. Sniff, sniff.

[jwwashburn]

Don Denkinger just called to express his support for Maz17.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by Maz17

And yes... you are going with the rule written in section 2.00, but if you look up 7.06 types a and b, and also MLB Manual 6.20 and 6.23 You will see why Drake enforced his call.

I AM GONNA SHOUT THIS! MLB UMPIRES, AND THAT IS WHO WE ARE CRITICIZING ON THIS POST... DO NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT GO WITH THE OBR ALONE. You can direct all the comments you want at me and say how wrong I am and how a I don't know bull. But here is the long and short of it. I sent a email to a MLB ump who was assured by Mike Port (VP of umpiring) that the call was correct by Rob Drake. So... take that video and study it, if you want to enforce things like a MLB ump.

WELL DONE ROB DRAKE!

Well now, Maz, when we see something that could be incorrect, and is at least worthy of discussion (like this OBS call), we will discuss it and, just maybe, throw in a little criticism if we felt a rule was misapplied or a call was missed. Doesn't matter if it's a LL, HS, college, or pro umpire. No need to shout.

And to my knowlege the criticism in this thread has been of the constructive, how do we do that better when we see it, variety.

If you're gonna go and name drop like that, tell us what the e-mail said. What was the explanation? How does MLB interpret obstruction? In the absence of the MLB Umpire Manual, which the general public cannot purchase, all I and most other umpires here have is what is written in OBR and the various commentaries on the rules, such as Evans, J/R, etc. I don't want to enforce things like an MLB umpire if I do not know the rationale behind my call.

If anyone cares, I thought is was obstruction when I saw the video, but if he passed on it I could completely understand why. I wouldn't say the umpire kicked it either way.

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by Maz17

There is no degree of obstruction.

Sure there is.

First, you've got two types, a and b. Type a is an automatic award of the next base, whereas b is a judgement call on negating the actual impedement. Giving him the plate was not an automatic. So for type b, there really are degrees for obstruction.

[Maz17]

Originally Posted by kylejt

Sure there is.

First, you've got two types, a and b. Type a is an automatic award of the next base, whereas b is a judgement call on negating the actual impedement. Giving him the plate was not an automatic. So for type b, there really are degrees for obstruction.

That is not a degree. It is two different types. Labeled types a and b, because it has two different stipulations. If a play is being made or not. That is not a degree of obstruction, its labeling obstruction based on a important stipulation, which there in sense gives a different penalty.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by Maz17

And you are all right about showing Drake some support. The guy has been working his tail off since 99' with no contract or no pension plan! DRAKE... GOOD CALL!

I just said to give him support for his lack of a mullet.

He is paid the amount that they said they would pay him-so what is the problem? He chooses to work without a contract or pension. Most everyone in the USA works without a contract and almost NOBODY has a pension.