obstruction

[mroyal]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

mroyal,

That is just flat out wrong. In the OP, the obstructed R2 is properly awarded 3B.

I "get around" the part of the rule you underlined by reading the entire rule. Especially the part that says:



I also read the case plays that have a runner obstructed while "returning" to a base who is awarded an advance base. (e.g. 8.3.2A, 8.3.2B(b) ).

The rule is certainly poorly worded, but in FED an obstructed runner is always awarded "one base beyond".

JM

8.3.2b - obstruction due to a fake tag. No play being made on the runner, just deception by the defense. I would give the base award.
8.3.2a - obstruction happens during rundown. Play is being made on an advancing runner. I would give the base award.

But the following case play is more inline with the OP


*8.3.2 SITUATION G:

F1 attempts to pick off R1 at first base. As F3 is about to receive the throw, he drops his knee and (a) blocks the entire base prior to possessing the ball or (b) blocks part of the base prior to possessing the ball or (c) blocks the entire base while being in possession of the ball. RULING: Obstruction in (a); legal in (b) and (c).

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:

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.

In this OP, the runner would have returned to 2nd (he's not advancing to 3rd) had there been no obstruction. Granted the wording in this particluar rule seems to contradict itself. But I see the later wording in this same ruling stating "Runner(s) will be awarded appropriate base(s) per umpire judgement." In this OP, in my judgement, he's not going to 3rd. He's returning to 2nd. Due to the obstruction, the defense looses the out and R2 gets 2nd.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by mroyal

I would interpret that in (a) the runner is returning to 1st and is awarded that base as per rule 8.3.2:

Do you mean rule 8-3-2? 8.3.2 is a casebook play.

[mroyal]

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

[dash_riprock]

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.