obstruction
 

Fed rules.

R2 takes a large secondary lead. F2 attempts to thrown behind him to pick him off. F6 covers 2nd. R2 dives back into 2nd and his access to the base is completely blocked by F6 - about 3 feet short of the bag. F6 does NOT have the ball when R2 dives into his legs. F6 then catches the throw and tags R2. Clearly appears to be obstruction.

Is R2 awarded 3rd? i know Fed used to be a minimum one base award on obstruction - is this still true? BRD 2009 #34 indicates that the obstruction is ignored if the runner was not attempting to advance.

thanks,

1 base minimum award in FED.

newump,

Yes, under FED rules an obstructed runner is awarded a minimum of "one base beyond" his position at the time he is obstructed.

In your sitch, the R2 would be awarded 3B, despite the fact that he was obstructed while returning to 2B.

JM

That typically happens when BR rounds 1b and bumps into F3, or R1 or R2 rounds 2b and bumps into F6, but neither has any intention of advancing and a play is not being made. In the situation you posted the runner is awarded the next base.

thanks. i awarded the runner 3rd in my situation, but started to 2nd guess myself after reading BRD

it is type b obstruction that is ignored (in OBR) if he isn't trying to advance. this situation is type a obstruction and would result in the award of at least one base in all codes.

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

JJ

You might be on to something.....:eek:

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

In the OP, R2 is attempting to return to 2nd (not going to 3rd) and is put out due to an OB. Since he's not attempting to run to 3rd, he would be awarded 2nd since that's the base he's attempting to reach/return to. Thus the defense is penalized by not getting the out.

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

Keep reading.............

The obstructed runner is awarded a minimum of one base beyond his position on base when the obstruction occurred.

"each other runner affected ..." would be those forced by virtue of the award. As an example, R2 & R3, same play as the OP. R2 is awarded 3B & R3 is awarded HP (He is the 'affected runner') as he is forced to advance.

Not sure what this has to do with my post... My post deals with the obstructed runner as does UmpJM (nee CoachJM), who posted basically the same thing as I just above mine.......

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:

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.

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