R1 is stealing 2B, F6 moves to 1B side of bag to take the throw. However, the pitch gets away from the catcher. F6 does not step away. R1 has to go around F6 to hit the back corner of the base as she mades the turn towards 3B. BU signals OBS. R2 decides to try for 3B, but F2's throw nails R1 for an easy out at 3B.

#1 - Runner can not be put out between the bases of which she was obstructed.

#2 - If runner goes beyond the base she should have been protected to, then she is on her own. Any outs made would stand.

I would imagine your first reaction is "dead ball, obstruction, runner is returned to 2B."

However, the obstruction actually took place between 1B and 2B. That is where F6 was located; that is where R1 was when she started to alter her running. So - technically - R1 should be protected to 2B, and, because she tried to advance beyond the protected base, the out should stand.

So, what say you? I realize that this is not common sense nor spirit of the rule, but would you call her out on a very literal interpretation of the rule?

WMB

Under the given situation,I would be inclined to let the out stand.I would have a Delayed Dead Ball on the obstruction at second base,but wouldnt protect her all the way into third base.The runner is protected to the base,in the umpires judgement,she would have gotten had she not been obstructed.If the ball would have gotten far enough from the catcher that she would have achieved third base,then I would protect her under the obstruction rule.

Jeff

The runner is obstructed making the turn at 2nd, so I have obstruction, and cannot be tagged out between 2nd and 3rd. If out, then "dead ball" and runner returned to 2nd. The obstruction is signalled at the time of obstruction, which in this case is rounding 2nd. At the time of obstruction, I have no idea of how far the ball will roll from the catcher. If it rolls a good distance, and she is thrown out by a foot at 3rd, I'll place her at 3rd. At the time of obstruction, I don't know how far she would have safely run, until someone actually gets hold of the ball and makes a play.

Well, despite the fact that you have R1 & R2 both going to 3B while there was no R2 in the play....:)

It isn't possible to call a runner out on a "very literal interpretation of the rule". Just because the runner was obstructed between 1B & 2B doesn't mean the umpire cannot protect the runner to 3B. Without saying so, it seems you have inserted a presumption that the umpire is only going to protect the runner to 2B and that is fine. However, it is by no means a "literal" interpretation of a rule, but a judgment call by the ruling umpire.

One note though. If the ruling umpire is only going to protect a runner to 2nd in this scenario, s/he had better not have the left arm raised while that runner is between 2nd & 3rd as that is an indication to the coaches and players that obstruction is still an active call and has not been dropped. IOW, by doing so, you may place the runner in jeopardy.

Lady, you should have stayed at 2nd! OUT!!!

http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/stupid.gif

Keep in mind that the defense committed the infraction. I'd give the benefit of the doubt to the runner. Allowing for the HTBT nature of just about any obstruction / interference situation, this sounds like dead ball & return the runner to 2nd.

What's missing is the part about protecting the runner as far as you think she would have gotten had there not been obstruction with the benefit of doubt going to the runner. For me something has to change before I bring down my left arm, i.e. ball comes to the infield or the runner changes direction. For example, and I've used this before, ball hit hard down 1st base line and the catcher yells out "FOUL" causing the runner to turn around to argue with me only to find that I am emphatically pointing fair. I then put out my left arm to indicate the verbal obstruction. Right stopped chasing the ball and BR took a wiiiiiide turn at 3rd and thought better of it as rightcenter had finally tracked down the ball and had thrown it to the cut off. I eventually awarded home even though the obstruction occured between home and 1st.

I believe that the part about not being put out between...is there mainly for the benefit of rundowns. Jim

Awwwwwwww, Mike, we had a lengthy discussion on a very similar subject a coupla weeks ago, on this board. I said the same thing you just did and there was no support on that from anyone. They all seemed to agree the runner just had to do their thing and hope the umpire got it right later on.

Glad to see we did agree on this after all

Rick

Rick,

I said a few things. Which part did you believe we didn't agree?

Wait a minute.
This OBS occurred between 1st and 2nd, so the runner can be put out between 2nd and 3rd. That means the runner can not be returned to 2nd because of a tag at 3rd. If the runner is tagged before reaching 3rd, the result is either:
- out, or
- safe at 3rd because the ump judged that the OBS delayed the runner enough to cause the "out" at 3rd. In other words, the defense play at 3rd would not have been successful without the delay.

In the original post, it says "easy out at 3rd", which reads like more margin than the OBS caused and most likely an out that stands.

As I understood MWB's original question, he was asking how precise are we in determining which bases for the "between the bases" exception.

The obstruction occurred as the runner was rounding second.

The position of the fielder causing the obstruction is interesting, but ultimately not deciding. The decision is a judgment call of where the <u>obstruction</u> happened (i.e. where was the path of the runner impeded), not where the fielder was.

In a close call like this, as I said, I am inclined to give the benefit of the technicality to the runner. After all, if the fielder had been standing smack dab in the middle of the bag, you now have the obstructing fielder ON 2nd base, and not between any bases. What then? Technically - no protection on the "between bases" exception? I don't think so.

Anyhow, JMO.

In the previous discussion, several things were stated about the mechanics for the umpire on the obstruction and judgement about how far to go. I maintained that you had to give the signal for obstruction and hold it up until a few steps before the runner gets to the base you would award them.

I appeared to be the only who thought that way. I can't find the discussion now, but I'm pretty sure you stated that you could never determine how far to send a runner until the play was over, so how are you gonna know when to drop the arm? There were even comments (not by you)about not running through the infield with the arm extended during a play. I mentioned that you had to signal the coaches/runner about the obstruction. The reply was that the runners had to do their thing, and let the blue do their thing, which would be to award the proper base.

Anyway, I'm glad to see someone else is now agreeing with me on the mechanics on this issue.


Rick

Agree, where the runner is impeded governs. I interpreted these two phrases in the question as OBS on the way to 2nd.
- "F6 moves to 1B side of bag "
- "R1 has to go around F6 to hit the back corner of the base"
If F6 is on the 1st base side, I don't see how that obstructs between 2nd and 3rd. If the runner had only attempted 2nd, it was still OB and if a tag was made as the runner went around F6, I would award 2nd and not 3rd.

Where the runner is impeded also governs when the fielder is ON the base. If she slows down approaching, the OBS is before the base. If she manages to go full speed to the base and the slows down, the OBS is after the base.

Me too.

Really think I would have to see the play
 

The runner didn't advance to 3rd because of the obstruction. The runner was able to attempt an advance to 3rd because of the bad throw from the catcher. The runner was not obstructed going to 3rd but on the way into 2nd. The original base being stolen was 2nd. The runner made a new decision after the play at 2nd and newly decided to try for 3rd because of the overthrow.

I say the runner was not protected to 3rd and that the defense made a good recovery. Runner is out.

But still, to see the play rather than try to guess at the minor points and make a firm decision, is really needed.

Really? And it says that where? I don't believe it can be a clear-cut as many here would like to make it.

Just because the obstruction occured at a certain physical point does not mean that is the only area where the umpire can protect the runner. The umpire can protect them to the dugout if they chose to do so.

Can the runner be called out after passing the base to which they were protected? Absolutely, if that is what the umpire deems proper. Can the umpire place a runner on a base passed if that was the base to which the umpire protected the runner? If the umpire thinks it is appropriate, yep!

Obstruction is so judemental, the only differences we can have about it pertains to following or ignoring any part of the rule. Of course, we may all see this type of play differently, but that's why we get the big bucks!

JMHO,

I agree with Mike's assessment.The key to obstruction is we protect the runner to the base we feel in our judgement they would have made had obstruction not ocurred.If they proceed beyond that,they are liable to be put out.

Jeff

I wasn't talking about which base can or can't be awarded. I was responding specifically to Dakota's comment about where the runner was obstructed versus the position of the fielder. Placement of the runner is a separate question.

My point was about the location of the runner when obstructed determining the bases for the "can't be put out between" part of the rule. The second point was that if the OBS was before 2nd and the runner was tagged before 2nd; "I would award 2nd and not 3rd", assuming I judged the OBS allowed the tag to occur before 2nd.

Okay, my quotation of your statement wasn't specific enough. The three sentences above is to what I was referring.

I do not believe it is that cut and dry as the statement you make seems to be. I know it seems logical, but there are too many strange things that happen on the field to etch it in stone that this is the way it is to be called.

Can someone please post the rules, as stated in the various jurisdictions? I don't have my books handy, but I'm pretty sure I'd either give her 3rd or put her back at 2nd.

A different situation, to clarify what may be a misunderstanding on my part.

Batter hits ball to the fence. F3, standing where F3 started and watching the ball, is right in the path of the BR rounding first. No intent on F3, but the players collide, slowing BR. Batter hustles to third and is then caught in a rundown between 3B and home, and tagged out. Is BR protected between third and home? Is there any situation where umpire can put the runner back at third, or are the only options A) Out, or B) Run scored?

This is purely judgment. I'm having a hard time visualizing how I would put the runner back on 3rd, barring a second obstruction during the rundown.

With the obstruction at 1st, I'd give the runner an extra step or more (depending on how much she was slowed) for the remainder of the play, assuming she continues full-speed, non-stop.

If I judge she would have beaten the throw instead of being caught in a rundown had there been no obstruction, then home is the award. If I judge she was a dead duck regardless and should have had the sense to say at 3rd, then OUT is the call.

Of course, no "rule" covers all, but the above is how I would try to determine the bases covered by "can't be put out between" for the example provided by Dakota; given no unusual circumstances. I guess an added piece would be if the runner slows down before and after the base; the later slow down would apply. The main point is where the runner is impeded governs, not where the fielder is.

Ditto.

I can buy into that. Here is part of my thought. If a runner is approaching 2B and sees F6 heading to the base and starts to check up in anticipation of a potential collision. If for some reason the runner heads back to 1B, is the runner protected between 1st & 2nd?

Or,

If F6 is standing on 2B and, at the last moment, the runner attempts to check-up, but touches the inside corner of the bag and continues toward the 3rd base line trying to stop and return to 2B. Is she not protected because she passed the base to which she was protected?

Obviously, both HTBT plays which would require the application of a little common sense yet possibly a contradiction to the literal wording in the book. I guess that's why they call it judgment. :)

Egg on my face
 

I obviously didn't understand the original scenario...

Having read the scenario more thoroughly I now realize that the throw was not from the catcher to F6 at 2nd base but from the catcher to F5 at 3rd (following a passed ball or a wild pitch) to tag the runner out.

For me the judgement would be "Did the runner get tagged out due to the stupid actions of F6 (remaining on the base) or did the runner get tagged out because of her own stupid actions (trying to steal two bases when it wasn't really possible)?"

So it really depends upon all of the had to be there things. Where did the ball get away to - straight back or down the 1st base line? Is the runner fast or slow? Did the catcher make a spectacular recovery or routine? Did F6 just cause the runner to change paths slightly or was there a collision?

I can't offer an answer without having seen the play. The answer from the on the scene umpire has to be based upon the primary question given above - Did F6 cause the out or was the runner trying for more than she could achieve? If F6 is the cause, runner is safe at 3rd. If the runner was going for more than was reasonably possible, runner is out.

This is a buck ninety-five play... not that big of a deal. And there is no way to give a mechanical, always will work, answer. Would have had to see the entire play to make a proper judgement.