Getting Technical on Obstruction

WestMichBlue · #1 (**permalink**) Sat Oct 04, 2003, 08:38pm

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

mo99 · #2 (**permalink**) Sat Oct 04, 2003, 08:53pm

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

blue · #3 (**permalink**) Sat Oct 04, 2003, 10:06pm

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.

IRISHMAFIA · #4 (**permalink**) Sat Oct 04, 2003, 10:53pm

Quote:

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
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

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.

Elaine "Lady Blue" · #5 (**permalink**) Sun Oct 05, 2003, 10:04am

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

Dakota · #6 (**permalink**) Sun Oct 05, 2003, 03:12pm

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.

ChampaignBlue · #7 (**permalink**) Sun Oct 05, 2003, 05:31pm

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

TexBlue · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Oct 06, 2003, 01:14am

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

IRISHMAFIA · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Oct 06, 2003, 08:54am

Quote:

Originally posted by TexBlue
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?

CecilOne · #10 (**permalink**) Mon Oct 06, 2003, 09:14am

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.

Dakota · #11 (**permalink**) Mon Oct 06, 2003, 09:33am

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 obstruction 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.

TexBlue · #12 (**permalink**) Mon Oct 06, 2003, 11:41am

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

CecilOne · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Oct 06, 2003, 01:12pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Dakota
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 obstruction 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.

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.

CecilOne · #14 (**permalink**) Mon Oct 06, 2003, 01:15pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Dakota
... snip ... In a close call like this, as I said, I am inclined to give the benefit of the technicality to the runner. ... snip ...

Me too.

DownTownTonyBrown · #15 (**permalink**) Mon Oct 06, 2003, 01:37pm

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.