The Official Forum - obstruction

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)

- - obstruction (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/53447-obstruction.html)

i keep forgetting the difference between "-" and "."...

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ (Post 605967)

Yep, otherwise teams would be doing this all the time knowing there would not be a penalty.

JJ

But there is a penalty...the runner would get the base he was obstructed from returning to and the defense looses the out. Sounds like a penalty to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mroyal

Though the ruling is obstruction, there is no ruling on an awarded base in the case play. I would interpret that in (a) the runner is returning to 1st and is awarded that base as per rule 8-3-2.

You can judge that the runner would have achieved 1st had the OBS not occurred. But the base award is subject to the rest of 8-3-2, which you have conveniently omitted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mroyal (Post 606156)

But there is a penalty...the runner would get the base he was obstructed from returning to and the defense looses the out. Sounds like a penalty to me.

The FED penalty for obstruction is one base beyond the position of the obstructed runner. JM posted the rule, which is part of the same rule that you've been quoting (8-3-2).

I'll post it again for you:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rule 8-3-2

If the runner achieves the base he was attempting
to acquire, then the obstruction is ignored. The obstructed runner is awarded a
minimum of one base beyond his position on base when the obstruction
occurred.

It's a mistake to try to interpret the FED rule without this sentence, since the first sentence of the rule is potentially misleading by itself.

The fact is, if you have a runner returning to a base (R1 on a pickoff obstructed by F3, for example) this obstructed runner gets 2B in every rule code.

If you choose not to enforce the rules on this point, that's entirely up to you. Please be aware that you have no rules support for your position.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mroyal (Post 606024)

How do you work around the first part of that rule: 8.3.1?

When a runner is obstructed (2-22) while advancing or returning to a base, the umpire shall award the obstructed runner and each other runner affected by the obstruction the bases they would have reached, in his opinion, had there been no obstruction. If the runner achieves the base he was attempting to acquire, then the obstruction is ignored.[FONT=Helvetica-Condensed][SIZE=5][COLOR=#231f20][FONT=Helvetica-Condensed][SIZE=5][COLOR=#231f20][SIZE=5]

You're not the first to note (or be caught by) that seeming discrepancy. It gets talked about on the boards a couple of times a year.

FED made some change to this rule a couple of years ago, and the wording they added made it confusing.

They mean that if the runner acquires the base to which he was ADVANCING, and that's as far as he would go, that the obstrcution would be ignored. If he's obstructed while returning, then he gets the minimum one base award.