Obstruction Question
 

R2 with 1 out, runner stealing on pitch, hot shot between 3B & SS. 3B dives to attempt to field the ball but not successful. When he gets up he steps in path of R2 - train wreck. R2 gets up and goes to 3rd. Time called to make sure both are okay. 3B coach wants home for his runner since he was stealing, had there been no collision he would have scored easily. Obstruction awards one base beyond base already acquired. Does the runner get home? NFHS rules.

Perhaps

8-3-2

ART. 2 . . . When a runner is obstructed while advancing or returning to a base, the umpire shall award the obstructed runner a minimum of one base beyond his position on base when the obstruction occurred. The umpire shall award the obstructed runner and each other runner(s) any additional bases that would nullify the obstruction.

And, just to make sure it's clear, the awards are based on what you think he would have reached absent the obstruction, not what his coaches think.

This is really a YHTBT play. I think awards depend a great deal on what happens after the obstruction. I might protect the runner to third, and I might award home. The fact the runner was stealing is irrelevant. He could also simply have been advancing on the single.

As you've been told, this is HTBT - are you an umpire or fan?

If fan - what matters is what the umpire thinks would have happened had there been no obstruction, and generally we're going to err on the side of the offense ... if we think the player would likely have tried for home, and had a shot at it - we're going to score him.

If umpire - you should already know this... but I worry about your statement that "Obstruction awards one base beyond base already acquired." That's simply not true. It could be no bases - it could be 4.

Incidentally, for our information - what happened to the player and the ball after the part you described. Did the runner go down, or just have to dodge a tad - where did the ball end up, who fielded it and did anything else happen (where did BR end up?)

He said FED rules, so the statement about the minimum award is correct.

True, and I didn't mean to shorthand it that way. I was trying too hard to say it in laymans terms, but I see why you assumed what I meant.

He seemed to be implying the runner should automatically get home - one base beyond the base already acquired... when it was really only (in this case) 2nd base that was already acquired - the minimum in this play being 3rd base. Which he ended up acquiring on his own. The "award" is very often the very same base the runner ends up getting to on their own.