Obstruction Protection

[Spence]

I'm told I left out one fact.

R1 rounded 2nd, was obstructed, went to 3B and rounded it and THEN saw R2 coming back to the bag. R1 then tried to get back to 2B.

Does that change anything in FED?

[DG]

Originally Posted by Spence

I'm told I left out one fact.

R1 rounded 2nd, was obstructed, went to 3B and rounded it and THEN saw R2 coming back to the bag. R1 then tried to get back to 2B.

Does that change anything in FED?

I believe it does.

3b coach must be asleep.

[RPatrino]

Originally Posted by Spence

I'm told I left out one fact.

R1 rounded 2nd, was obstructed, went to 3B and rounded it and THEN saw R2 coming back to the bag. R1 then tried to get back to 2B.

Does that change anything in FED?

So, R1 went all the way to third, went past third, and then for some reason decided he needed to go all the way back to second (probably because he saw R2 coming back to 3rd?) . While on his journey to 3rd, he was obstructed between 2nd and 3rd (you made a verbal, 'that's obstruction' call). Anything that happens after this point is irrelevant to the obstruction question (in FED). R1, after playing action is over, will be awarded 3rd, R2 (who I assume was originally at 2nd), gets home.

Now in OBR, unless R1 was obstructed on his return to 2nd, I would ignore the obstruction that occurred on his advance to third and the out would stand.

If, by some happy coincidence, the words 'that's obstruction' never left your lips, you are lucky my friend.

[Caesar's Ghost]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

So, R1 went all the way to third, went past third, and then for some reason decided he needed to go all the way back to second (probably because he saw R2 coming back to 3rd?) . While on his journey to 3rd, he was obstructed between 2nd and 3rd (you made a verbal, 'that's obstruction' call). Anything that happens after this point is irrelevant to the obstruction question (in FED).

Not true. Once the runner reaches the base he would have been awarded, the obstruction is ignored. You can have post obstruction evidence, of course, but that's going to apply to awarding additional bases. If the runenr decided to retreat, the obstruction isn't reinstated.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Caesar's Ghost

Not true. Once the runner reaches the base he would have been awarded, the obstruction is ignored. You can have post obstruction evidence, of course, but that's going to apply to awarding additional bases. If the runenr decided to retreat, the obstruction isn't reinstated.

Agree. When R1 acquires 3B, the obstruction has been nullified, the mandatory minimum 1-base award has been satisfied, and we're done with the OBS.

If that runner then (idiotically) chooses to return to 2B during live-ball action and is subsequently tagged out, that out stands. The runner doesn't get 3B, come what may. Had he been tagged out immediately after rounding 3B, that out would have stood, too, and for the same reason: the awarded base has been acquired.

[Spence]

Good info. Let me ask one more related question.

R1. BR hits a gapper. R1 is obstructed by SS and returns to 2nd base. BR would have had an easy double but sees R1 return so he tries to get back to 1B but is tagged out.

Do you award him 2nd base?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Spence

Good info. Let me ask one more related question.

R1. BR hits a gapper. R1 is obstructed by SS and returns to 2nd base. BR would have had an easy double but sees R1 return so he tries to get back to 1B but is tagged out.

Do you award him 2nd base?

Yes.

The FED penalty explicitly spells this out:
"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." (8-3-2)

BTW, the next sentence applies to your original case:
"If the runner achieves the base he was attempting to acquire, then the obstruction is ignored."

[thumpferee]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Yes.

The FED penalty explicitly spells this out:
"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." (8-3-2)

BTW, the next sentence applies to your original case:
"If the runner achieves the base he was attempting to acquire, then the obstruction is ignored."

Are you sure you read his post correctly?

Good info. Let me ask one more related question.

R1. BR hits a gapper. R1 is obstructed by SS and returns to 2nd base. BR would have had an easy double but sees R1 return so he tries to get back to 1B but is tagged out.

Do you award him 2nd base?

BR was not obstructed, R1 who was obstructed was returning to 2nd and BR was thrown out.

Never-mind, I c now.

I always thought it was runners in advance of the obstructed runner who would be effected, never looked at it from this aspect though. So even a following runner would be effected by the obstruction. Good to know MB, thanks! I obviously never had it happen or I would know better.

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Agree. When R1 acquires 3B, the obstruction has been nullified, the mandatory minimum 1-base award has been satisfied, and we're done with the OBS.

If that runner then (idiotically) chooses to return to 2B during live-ball action and is subsequently tagged out, that out stands. The runner doesn't get 3B, come what may. Had he been tagged out immediately after rounding 3B, that out would have stood, too, and for the same reason: the awarded base has been acquired.

Correct. As long as this is not a case of OBR type "A" (which is immediate dead ball) obstruction (which it isn't in this case) advancing to next base nullifies obstruction unless you think the runner would have advanced to home absent the obstruction (not the case here due to lead runner retreating).