Protection Between Bases with No other Runners

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Can players still take legal actions that begin a play that can result in either a runner advancing or an out?

Yes, because the ball is live.

The only possible action would be the pitcher leaving the circle or making a play on a runner standing on a base, both non-sensible, causes more problems than viable action and is a simple waste of time and energy. Remember how it was prior to a dead ball appeal? Remember how crazy it could get, even in the SP game? Wasn't the LBR instituted to eliminate all the bullshit and monkey business?

The players are there to play the game, not play games.

[jmkupka]

This is a PERFECT example, and an opportunity to list, obscure rule interpretations that even highly experienced umpires have gotten wrong.

As shown in this thread, I'll bet the majority of us would never have protected that runner once she retouched 1st and then left it.

How many of us would say, "foul ball, her foot was still in the box", even if BR clearly ran into a fair batted ball?

There are many more.

Not a hijack attempt. An opportunity.

And AtlUmpSteve, thanks for clarifying this rule. Manny, thanks for posting.

[RKBUmp]

The exception is a 2 part exception and requires both to be met to cancel the obstruction. The obstructed runner must reach the base they would have absent the obstruction AND a subsequent play on a different runner. The rule and exception makes no indication of the rule changing because there is no other runner on base.

USA has the exact same wording in its obstruction rule and rule supplement.