The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   CLE @ CIN 5-24, Obstruction? (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/53359-cle-cin-5-24-obstruction.html)

mbyron Sun May 24, 2009 09:31pm

CLE @ CIN 5-24, Obstruction?
 
Anybody see Rob Drake call obstruction on Cincy's F5 on Sunday? Grady Sizemore might have barely brushed him running from 3B to home on an overthrow, gets thrown out at the plate, and then is awarded home on the OBS.

Contact is not necessary for OBS, but I didn't see Sizemore have to move at all.

Naturally, the commentator in the video calls it "interference." :rolleyes:

Here's the link.

Ump Rube Sun May 24, 2009 10:48pm

Even MLB.com is calling it INT. (Says so in the caption) Although I have a rough connection at home right now (just a little choppy) it looks like a simple call to me. The runner, although slight, did adjust his running path due to F5 in the basepath.

yawetag Sun May 24, 2009 10:56pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ump Rube (Post 604434)
Even MLB.com is calling it INT. (Says so in the caption) Although I have a rough connection at home right now (just a little choppy) it looks like a simple call to me. The runner, although slight, did adjust his running path due to F5 in the basepath.

With a good connection, I agree. F5 was in the basepath.

Also, the announcer called it a "triple with an interference error"

dash_riprock Sun May 24, 2009 11:12pm

I don't see OBS there.

SanDiegoSteve Sun May 24, 2009 11:31pm

Had the F5 caused the runner to deviate his path in the slightest, it would have been obstruction. However, I did not see what Drake apparently saw. I saw the runner run right past F5 with no deviation in his path. He just got thrown out at the plate. Looked like a bad call to me.

zm1283 Mon May 25, 2009 12:17am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve (Post 604440)
Had the F5 caused the runner to deviate his path in the slightest, it would have been obstruction. However, I did not see what Drake apparently saw. I saw the runner run right past F5 with no deviation in his path. He just got thrown out at the plate. Looked like a bad call to me.

Agreed. I really didn't see Sizemore changing his path at all. F5 didn't do anything to slow him down or obstruct him. Drake kicked it.

archangel Mon May 25, 2009 08:30am

I was watching that game live yesterday with my adult son. He knows that I never get animated about an officials "call" during any sport....except yesterday.
Knowing that every umpire make mistakes, and the fact that MLB showed replays from like 7 different angles after it happened, I just cant see how that call was even made.

Or maybe, because Im a Reds fan, I wonder if I'm suffering from that mental disease that we've all seen, during our games, when fans complain on our good calls---fan bias!
Help me, doctor!

bossman72 Mon May 25, 2009 08:35am

That's a little picky to be calling obstruction... I would have nothing.

jwwashburn Mon May 25, 2009 09:04am

Rob Drake had a completely different angle than we did. Also, he got rid of his mullett...sooooo I give him the benefit of the doubt.

But look at this other clip...do you notice anything on the play at the plate? Do you see a tag?

Joe in Missouri

SanDiegoSteve Mon May 25, 2009 10:33am

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwwashburn (Post 604468)
Rob Drake had a completely different angle than we did. Also, he got rid of his mullett...sooooo I give him the benefit of the doubt.

But look at this other clip...do you notice anything on the play at the plate? Do you see a tag?

Joe in Missouri

Yes, Hanigan very clearly never touched Sizemore. The phantom obstruction call wasn't even necessary. How ironic.

Bishopcolle Mon May 25, 2009 10:43am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve (Post 604477)
Yes, Hanigan very clearly never touched Sizemore. The phantom obstruction call wasn't even necessary. How ironic.

I disagree...even with that view from a camera in slo-mo, it's hard to see (tag or no tag). How on earth can the PU make any other call...I think he got it right, from his view, making that split-second decision....Good call in my book....Like they say, hind sight.....

Maz17 Mon May 25, 2009 10:53am

All you kids are right... there was a phantom tag!

WITH THAT SAID! IT IS OBSTRUCTION. ANY DEVIATION OF HIS PATH IS! THAT LITTLE SHOULDER LEAN! OBSTRUCTION! YOU CAN PICK ON MLB GUYS ALL YOU WANT! DRAKE IS RIGHT! REPEAT! DRAKE IS RIGHT!

And that is why you guys are not in pro ball! It is a different interpretation at the MiLB/MLB level. The player should know better.

Ticky tacky call? So where do you draw the line? If he bulldozes him... okay I will call it? Your job is to enforce the rules, BLACK AND WHITE!

Dont give me this FED, Little League, PONY bull. Those kids are not professionals!

I say... good call! WAIT... I KNOW GOOD CALL!

David B Mon May 25, 2009 10:57am

Quote:

Originally Posted by dash_riprock (Post 604439)
I don't see OBS there.

He called it, but if I were doing a clinic for umpires, this would be one of those that I would use to say, "this is NOT obstruction".

He never interfered with the runners path, he simply moved his shoulder just a little to get past the fielder. The runner did not lose any momentum.

I think the replay shows the umpires was really watching the ball until the last second when he looks at the runner just as he passes the fielder. He then immediately calls the obstruction.

Does make you wonder what he saw that doesn't show on the video though ...

Thansk
David

umpjong Mon May 25, 2009 02:47pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maz17 (Post 604480)
All you kids are right... there was a phantom tag!

WITH THAT SAID! IT IS OBSTRUCTION. ANY DEVIATION OF HIS PATH IS! THAT LITTLE SHOULDER LEAN! OBSTRUCTION! YOU CAN PICK ON MLB GUYS ALL YOU WANT! DRAKE IS RIGHT! REPEAT! DRAKE IS RIGHT!

And that is why you guys are not in pro ball! It is a different interpretation at the MiLB/MLB level. The player should know better.

Ticky tacky call? So where do you draw the line? If he bulldozes him... okay I will call it? Your job is to enforce the rules, BLACK AND WHITE!

Dont give me this FED, Little League, PONY bull. Those kids are not professionals!

I say... good call! WAIT... I KNOW GOOD CALL!


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........

Paul L Mon May 25, 2009 02:49pm

Looked like a timely tag just below the left knee, the view of which was blocked in that clip by the runner's arm. Or . . . maybe not. PU looked like he had a good view of it.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1