Obstruction or not?

[Illini_Ref]

OBR.

Bunt in the air down the first base line about 25 feet from the plate. Pitcher dives and touches the ball just in fair territory and it rebounds foul. Pitcher after he touches lands and slides into the baseline where the BR contacts him.

This happened today in the STL vs. KC game and I didn't see an obstruction signal by the PU (BR reached first safely). However, Fernando Vina got called for OBST a few years ago when as a second baseman he did the same thing between first and second, missed the ball and his subsequent positioning caused him to contact the runner. The said that as soon as he missed the ball on his initial attempt he was no longer protected.

Difference???

[Matt]

Yep, there's a difference...first call was correct, second wasn't.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Illini_Ref

I didn't see an obstruction signal by the PU ...

There is no OBS signal in OBR. Just sayin' ...

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by mbyron

There is no OBS signal in OBR. Just sayin' ...

You don't point and say "That's Obstruction?"

[JR12]

On a muff,.the fielder is only protected for a step and a reach. Beyond that, we have interference. Sounds lime both calls were correct to me.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by JR12

On a muff,.the fielder is only protected for a step and a reach. Beyond that, we have interference. Sounds lime both calls were correct to me.

Uh, beyond that, you have obstruction.

[JR12]

On a muff,.the fielder is only protected for a step and a reach. Beyond that, we have interference. Sounds like both calls were correct to me.

[JR12]

Right. I meant obstruction.

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by mbyron

There is no OBS signal in OBR. Just sayin' ...

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

You don't point and say "That's Obstruction?"

Indeed. There is a signal in OBR for obstruction, and as Steve alluded to it, it's a simple point toward the offender with, "That's obstruction!"

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

You don't point and say "That's Obstruction?"

Sure, but that's not an "obstruction signal" per se, as FED has. That's what most umpires who work multiple codes think of when someone says "obstruction signal," and OBR doesn't use it.

I suppose you could say that the fist is not an obstruction signal either, that it's a delayed dead ball signal. In that case, I'll just shrug and plead ignorance of what he meant when he was looking for an "obstruction signal."

[asdf]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Sure, but that's not an "obstruction signal" per se, as FED has. That's what most umpires who work multiple codes think of when someone says "obstruction signal," and OBR doesn't use it.

I suppose you could say that the fist is not an obstruction signal either, that it's a delayed dead ball signal. In that case, I'll just shrug and plead ignorance of what he meant when he was looking for an "obstruction signal."

So, why else would he be pointing?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by asdf

So, why else would he be pointing?

Maybe to say, "You funny looking!"

[umpjim]

In this case, the proper signal for obstruction of the BR before he reaches 1B would be the time signal. Then maybe do some pointing for effect.