WS obstruction

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by zm1283

This is so unbelievably wrong I don't even know where to start.

Even if Craig made a little contact (Which I don't think he made much contact at all), it is totally irrelevant. He slid straight into third base and the somewhat poor throw pulled Middlebrooks off the base and onto the ground. If the throw is better or if he catches it, we're not having this discussion. Craig did nothing wrong and Middlebrooks obstructed him.

I'm with lawump. I can not believe there are umpires with experience above rec ball that don't think this was obstruction. It is baffling honestly.

Since you didn't see it, I'll explain it to you. Craig slid, and helped take Middlebrooks legs out from under him. It wasn't a dive for the ball by Middlebrooks. He was reaching for the ball...............actually Craig used Middlebrooks as support to get up, and when trying to go home he barely caught his foot on Middlebrooks back..............get real. Maybe obstruction in your book, but I don't ever recall seeing a play like the one that took place being call obstruction.

Instead of agreeing with the status quo, I would like to hear your take of the play.

The only point I'm trying to make different is that Middlebrooks was on the ground because Craig help get him there. The slide was clean. I just saw two players doing what they were supposed to do.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

The only point I'm trying to make different is that Middlebrooks was on the ground because Craig help get him there. The slide was clean. I just saw two players doing what they were supposed to do.

Not completely a true statement. Middlebrook was on the ground because he dove for the ball AND incidental contact with Craig in what can be described as a clean slide.

I also saw "two players doing what they were supposed to do" however, as an official it is your job to interpret if what happened is in accordance with the rules and if, or if not, rule accordingly, again in conformance with the rules.

Incidental contact relevant to "two players doing what they were supposed to do" is not treated the same way within the rulebook. And although we may not like that, it is our job to know the differences and rule accordingly.

Did Middlebrook "continue" to lay on the ground purposely? Although he can't disappear, the rules suggest that he has to. Unlike a batter in the box who is allowed to complete what he is doing then is given time to disappear.

Trying to officiate to what you think is fair and in the rules is not always what is really in the rules. But those are the rules.