OBS then INT

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Thats they way I have always undrstood it. Enforce in the order of the infractions unless the rules state otherwise.

Sure, enforce in order. But the question is: do you agree that the award for OBS "trumps" the penalty for INT?

[CT1]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Sure, enforce in order. But the question is: do you agree that the award for OBS "trumps" the penalty for INT?

On the field, I'd enforce as Welpe posted: score the run, B/R out. That's easy to defend.

But somewhere in the deep recesses of little o'l pea-brain, I seem to remember a phrase that goes something like "... without liability to be put out, unless he subsequently commits interference..."

Maybe I'm just mis-remembering.

[jicecone]

NFHS Def of Obstruction 2-22-1 gives two exceptions, 8-4-2c & 8-4-2d."Does not legally attempt to avoid a fielder in the immediate act of making a play on him" or c, "dives over a fielder". But it still doesn't state that these exceptions supersed OBS like 8-4-2e says "MC supersedes obstruction."

Do you agree that the award for OBS "trumps" the penalty for INT?

I don't believe I would be able to support that with a NFHS rule except in the case of MC.

As already pointed out and in "The Usual Suspects" 2004 by Carl Childress he points out this exact play. Then, he stated that you are to "Penalize first the obstruction then the interference", for both NCAA and NFHS. Until there is better guidelines I guess we go with prescedence.

I'm up for learning something new though.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by jicecone

As already pointed out and in "The Usual Suspects" 2004 by Carl Childress he points out this exact play. Then, he stated that you are to "Penalize first the obstruction then the interference", for both NCAA and NFHS. Until there is better guidelines I guess we go with prescedence.

I'm up for learning something new though.

It's not an issue of precedence. I know we penalize the infractions in the order of occurrence. The problem is WHAT'S THE PENALTY FOR THE INT? Score the run and call out the BR or cancel the run and call out R2?

FED rules list several infractions that supersede OBS, including MC and diving over a fielder. They neither include nor exclude INT. What about INT?

[David B]

I don't think you can cancel the run because of the interference. I think you would go for the out, which would be the BR in this play.

If there were other runners, I would think you would call out the runner closest to home.

I'm thinking about the rule that you can call a double play when the runner interferes at second etc., ; however, in those plays you don't have the obstruction to deal with which in FED is an automatic base.

Thanks
David

[thumpferee]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Sure, enforce in order. But the question is: do you agree that the award for OBS "trumps" the penalty for INT?

yes

You may think by scoring the run doesn't penalize for the INT, but where would the penalty be for the OBS?

In the op, R2 scores during a live ball after an OBS call, not an award of home
due to the OBS. Score the run, BR/R1 is out.

As for your follow up question if R2 interferes before touching HP it would have most likely been a play on him therefore the ball would have become dead. So, R2 is out and we have R1.