"Defensive Interference"

[flyingron]

Originally Posted by Cecil4

OBS at a base is presumed to be going to the next.

Yeah, so, nothing I said contradicts that.

The runner could be put out in between those bases if the runner commits an overriding violation.

Overriding?

[Tru_in_Blu]

The only thing that can't happen if the runner is obstructed BETWEEN bases is that they be put out. The umpire needs to either grant them the next base or send them back to the previous one.

Well, if a runner commits an act of interference (following OBS), she will be called out.

If the runner passes another runner (following OBS), she will be called out.

Even though obstructed, she must otherwise run the bases legally.

[Bulldog Blue]

The point that I was trying to make is that both umpires did not apply the rule(s) properly, because they did not even know what OBS is, as they only used the word interference. No obstruction was ever called nor referred to. And their ruling/decision clearly showed that neither one of the pair knew how to recognize, nor apply the OBS rule. And these are both well-experienced USA Umpires working an NFHS game.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by Bulldog Blue

And these are both well-experienced USA Umpires working an NFHS game.

Perhaps not so much, huh?

USA & NFHS are probably 96% the same in terms of rules and 100% the same for mechanics.

[Cecil4]

Originally Posted by Bulldog Blue

The point that I was trying to make is that both umpires did not apply the rule(s) properly, because they did not even know what OBS is, as they only used the word interference. No obstruction was ever called nor referred to. And their ruling/decision clearly showed that neither one of the pair knew how to recognize, nor apply the OBS rule. And these are both well-experienced USA Umpires working an NFHS game.

Your point is now well understood, even with the questionable experience of the umpires involved.
As above, the rule and mechanics are the same.