Defensive Obstruction? NFHS

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Reading that ruling, it's not clear to me that the runner is actually awarded the base.

I know "the runner cannot be called out between the bases they were obstructed". If that is the primary decision point, then I guess there would be no choice but to award third base.

However, the ruling states: "The umpire will award R1 and any other runners the base or bases they would have reached had there been no obstruction."

So if the umpire's judgment concludes that no way would R1 have made it to third base safely had there been no obstruction, can he call her out?

BTW, the ruling also states that F6 is ejected.

An obstructed runner cannot be put out between the two bases, even if she was "dead" on an infield play. The defense cannot be rewarded for a rules violation even if the violation would not have changed the destiny of the play. We cannot call her out under 8-4-3b. R1 must be awarded a base; either 2B or 3B. Since R1 has two succeeding runners behind her, 3B is the only option.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by teebob21

An obstructed runner cannot be put out between the two bases, even if she was "dead" on an infield play. The defense cannot be rewarded for a rules violation even if the violation would not have changed the destiny of the play. We cannot call her out under 8-4-3b. R1 must be awarded a base; either 2B or 3B. Since R1 has two succeeding runners behind her, 3B is the only option.

How is the defense being rewarded?

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

How is the defense being rewarded?

By calling the obstructed runner out.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

How is the defense being rewarded?

I agree this isn't a reward for the defense to get the out. And I know we often say obstruction is not punitive so I'm pretty sure understand where you're coming from with this approach. But the rule couldn't be more clear that the runner cannot be out between the obstructed bases. And the case play that TeeBob quotes is pretty clear as well. So how do you reconcile the rule with the way you want this called?

Separately, how far would you extend this? Runner is bumped by the shortstop barely slowing her and she is out by 2 steps.

Or suppose the shortstop completely knocks down the runner who is stealing and who is sure to be out at third on a hopper up the line but third basemen boots the ball badly. Do you then change the award and now she is protected between second and third?

[CecilOne]

Is there an aspect as to what actually constitutes hindering/impeding the runner? IOW, if the R or BR was a easy out, did the OBS actually hinder or impede?

[Tru_in_Blu]

I'd say being hindered or impeded has no time element associated with it. If you were impeded on a sidewalk it could have been an honest bump or you might have had your pocket picked. Maybe it was some rude person looking at their cell phone instead of where they were walking.

We've had a couple of our most knowledgeable umpires suggest that if we have a dead to rights force play for an out, take the out and "award the runner a spot on the bench".

Emotionally, and half-logically that might make sense. However, unless there is a rule citation to support that position, I have to call the OBS and award a base.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Is there an aspect as to what actually constitutes hindering/impeding the runner? IOW, if the R or BR was a easy out, did the OBS actually hinder or impede?

Then there is the case of a runner leaving 2b on a shallow fly ball to CF who runs into F5 and is knocked down moving away from 2b as s/he was beiing doubled off via a live ball appeal. If F5 recovered and started back to 2b, was s/he obstructed by F5 or actually aided?

I don't believe anyone is claiming the rules shouldn't be enforced as written, but as CecilOne points out, was the player actually impeded, hindered or whatever?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Then there is the case of a runner leaving 2b on a shallow fly ball to CF who runs into F5 and is knocked down moving away from 2b as s/he was beiing doubled off via a live ball appeal. If F5 recovered and started back to 2b, was s/he obstructed by F5 or actually aided?

I don't believe anyone is claiming the rules shouldn't be enforced as written, but as CecilOne points out, was the player actually impeded, hindered or whatever?

Oh sure, answer a question with a question.