What's the call ?

[ODJ]

O.P. -

BR was obstructed AFTER obtaining 1st base. The minimum penalty is BR placed one base beyond, putting him at 2nd. R2 goes to 3rd.

Punish the offender - the defense. By calling BR out, where's the penalty?

On a philosophical note: Dave Yeast, former NCAA Coordinator, told an NCAA meeting in '04 to not have an "opinion" of how far you will protect the obstructed runner. Let the play give you the information and base your judgement on the results of the play. His contention was/is that umpires have snap opinions as to how far the runner should advance before the play ends.

Example:
The fastest batter-runner in the state hits a shot to right field, is obstructed after touching first, and is tagged out at 3rd by a whisker. Call?

Majority of umpires respond with: "Out. He shouldn't have gone past 2nd."

What if, on this play the fastest batter-runner is safe at 3rd. Would you call time, and say to the coach - "Coach, your runner is safe at third, but in my opinion he shouldn't have gone past second, so I'm going to put him back at 2nd base." I would hope no one ever says such a thing.

In the former example, the umpire created an opinion and determined what the result of the "should" be without waiting for the result of the play.

Example:
If the slowest batter in the state hits the same shot to right field, is again obstructed after 1st base, and is tagged out halfway between 2nd and 3rd.
Call?
I have an out. The obstruction (an ordinary bump) did not cause such a hinderance as to be out by 40 feet.

Point is to let the play happen, and then render a decision. We're told, for timing's sake, to wait and take our time, but with instances of obstruction, we are far to quick to judge.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ODJ

O.P. -

BR was obstructed AFTER obtaining 1st base. The minimum penalty is BR placed one base beyond, putting him at 2nd. R2 goes to 3rd.

Nope. OBR, type B obstruction. No minimum award.

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by ODJ

What if, on this play the fastest batter-runner is safe at 3rd. Would you call time, and say to the coach - "Coach, your runner is safe at third, but in my opinion he shouldn't have gone past second, so I'm going to put him back at 2nd base." I would hope no one ever says such a thing.

I hope not, either. Runners are allowed to advance past the awarded base, but they're in jeopardy of being out if they do.

[rcaverly]

Originally Posted by ODJ

O.P. -BR was obstructed AFTER obtaining 1st base. The minimum penalty is BR placed one base beyond, putting him at 2nd. R2 goes to 3rd.

As stated elsewhere, the play on the BR was after he touched the base to which the umpire protected him. Nothing else is required by the umpire to nullify the obstruction.

Originally Posted by ODJ

O.P. -Punish the offender - the defense. By calling BR out, where's the penalty?

The first offender was the D when they obstructed the runner. The umpire saw it, called it and protected the runner to the base he would have acquired had there been no offending obstruction.

The next offender was the O when they tried to put two runners on the same base to which only one was entitled. The umpire saw it, called it and retired the trailing runner, the one not entitled to the base.

Originally Posted by ODJ

On a philosophical note: Dave Yeast, former NCAA Coordinator, told an NCAA meeting in '04 to not have an "opinion" of how far you will protect the obstructed runner. Let the play give you the information and base your judgement on the results of the play. His contention was/is that umpires have snap opinions as to how far the runner should advance before the play ends.

It must have been one Hell of a meeting back in '04 with Dave waxing philosophic. But, perhaps the point of his philosophy was that other things can happen after the obstruction, but before the end of continuous action, that may change the base/s to which the umpire may make awards or call outs. Others have referred to it as "post-obstruction evidence," I wasn't there at that particular meeting, but I don't think that philosophy is relevant to the OP.