Double Obstruction

[tcannizzo]

Originally posted by Dakota
My guess is you have the discussion of "cannot be put out between the bases where the obstruction occurred" with the general obstruction rule. There was a change in the "cannot be put out between the bases ..." in 2005 dealing with an intervening play on another runner. That is probably what they were discussing.

Read the rule. ASA 8-5-B-4

Says nothing about any obligation on the part of the runner to continue to try to reach that base.

There are a couple of things I don't like about ASA 8-5-B-4:
1. it says something that makes it arguably unenforceable: "...nor is attempting to receive a batted or thrown ball..." We know that this is wrong as it has been changed. Attempting to receive a thrown ball is not a current rule.

2. It is the only rule that refers to awarding a base that does not also include the phrase "is put out".

There are three occurances of the phrase "awarding a base" is preceded by the condition that the runner "is put out". Specifically, 8-5-B-2 and POE 36. Rule 8-5-B-4 is the only occurance that does not.

Certainly there are multiple occurances of the phrase "would have reached" in 8-5-B-1-Exceptions-1-a, and 8-5-B-3 but none of them include an awardof bases.

POE 36: "If the obstructed runner is put out prior to reaching the base he would have reached had there not been obstruction, a dead ball will be called and obstructed runner, and each other runner affected by the obstruction, will be awarded the base(s) the runner would have reached."

There are other subsequent occurances of the phrase "would have reached" in POE 36, but these refer back to the preceding paragraph.

Clearly, (at leaset to me), the runner must make the attempt and be put out in order to be awarded a base.