An interesting force out/obstruction

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

You don't ignore the obstruction, you either enforce or not enforce the penalty.

I wouldn't put it this way. This issue is whether the hindrance occurred before the runner was out. If before, then it's OBS. If not, then not.

If you rule obstruction, you must enforce the penalty.

[Rich Ives]

R2 was header to 3B. The play was made at 3B. The play was thus made on R2. R2 was obsrtructed. Type A. Automatic minimum one base award. R2 gets 3B. There's no woulda-shoulda about Type A.

In FED it's ALWAYS a minimum one base.

Convince me I'm wrong.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

R2 was header to 3B. The play was made at 3B. The play was thus made on R2. R2 was obsrtructed. Type A. Automatic minimum one base award. R2 gets 3B. There's no woulda-shoulda about Type A.

In FED it's ALWAYS a minimum one base.

Convince me I'm wrong.

If you're talking to me, my point is that it's impossible to hinder a retired runner.

[rbmartin]

If F5 steps on 3rd before contact between R2 and F6...out and no obstruction.
If contact between R2 and F6 happens before F5 steps on 3rd (regardless of how far away the runner might be) ...award the runner 3rd base (for OBR - dead ball....for FED delayed dead ball).

[RPatrino]

In regards to the OP, if the obstruction occurred after R2 was put out then you don't have obstruction, right? BUT, this would have been Type A (OBR) had you ruled the runner, absent the obstruction, could have beat the throw to the bag on the force out. So, you have to 'umpire' in this case, and use your best judgement based on the situation.

In type B (OBR only!) you have the option to penalize as to nullify the act of obstruction, again, having to 'umpire' and award or NOT award based on that. In FED, you have no option, you penalize at least one base.

So, I would put it 'that way' for Type B obstruction for the OBR rule set only.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

In regards to the OP, if the obstruction occurred after R2 was put out then you don't have obstruction, right? BUT, this would have been Type A (OBR) had you ruled the runner, absent the obstruction, could have beat the throw to the bag on the force out. So, you have to 'umpire' in this case, and use your best judgement based on the situation.

In type B (OBR only!) you have the option to penalize as to nullify the act of obstruction, again, having to 'umpire' and award or NOT award based on that. In FED, you have no option, you penalize at least one base.

So, I would put it 'that way' for Type B obstruction for the OBR rule set only.

NO!

If you rule obstruction he gets the base. No woulda-shoulda on type A.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by mbyron

If you're talking to me, my point is that it's impossible to hinder a retired runner.

The play was being made on a runner who was obstructed. Basic type a definition is it not?

[RPatrino]

Rich, my point was/is. If you rule obstruction on this play, it is Type A, and you would award R2 third. There is no 'shoulda/woulda' on Type A. Dead ball, award a base. The judgement factor is WHEN did THIS obstruction occur? Before/simultaneously or after the out?

[thumpferee]

And if it happens at the same time, tie goes to the runner!

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by thumpferee

And if it happens at the same time, tie goes to the runner!

I was waiting for this one! Good one!

[celebur]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Rich, my point was/is. If you rule obstruction on this play, it is Type A, and you would award R2 third. There is no 'shoulda/woulda' on Type A. Dead ball, award a base. The judgement factor is WHEN did THIS obstruction occur? Before/simultaneously or after the out?

But your previous post implies something quite different than that:

Originally Posted by RPatrino

In regards to the OP, if the obstruction occurred after R2 was put out then you don't have obstruction, right? BUT, this would have been Type A (OBR) had you ruled the runner, absent the obstruction, could have beat the throw to the bag on the force out. So, you have to 'umpire' in this case, and use your best judgement based on the situation.

The bolded part implies that the judgement is whether or not the runner would have beaten the play had there been no obstruction. (You may not have intended that, but that's how it reads.)

[RPatrino]

Please feel free to disregard the original post.

Thank You.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

The play was being made on a runner who was obstructed. Basic type a definition is it not?

Not if he's a retired runner at the time of the hindrance. If the runner bumps into F5 5 seconds after the ball has been thrown back to F1, are you still asking for obstruction, coach?

Of course, the hindrance might have happened first: all I'm saying is that the umpire has a judgment to make about which happened first.

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

The play was being made on a runner who was obstructed. Basic type a definition is it not?

Nope, coach:

The out was recorded/ play was made on a runner who LATER was "obstructed" separately from the play/ out.

There is no rule penalizing the hinderance of a RETIRED runner who continues to run the bases, and in fact, NOTHING the defense does AFTER Rx is out can make him "UNout" or entitle him to any base award.

[mbyron]

Carter, the OP says the OBS happened at the "very same moment" that the out was recorded. As usual, we have to judge which happened first. It might well be the OBS, in which case, I'm sure both of us would enforce the penalty.

But you're restating my point regarding the other possibility: it's impossible to obstruct a retired runner.