Incidental Contact??

[Just Curious]

Under the double first base guidelines, it would seem implied that one reason for the double bases is to avoid collisions between the BR and F3..
Sitch.. F3 is straddling the white bag with one foot, in the dirt, on the baseline from 1B to 2B and the other on the orange bag.. A non-malicious collision occurs due to the close play at 1B.
F3 has the ball before hand, BR out, no obtruction, but the collision is hard and both F3 and the BR go down pretty hard..
From basketball, if there's no advantage gain by one player over another and regardless of the medical outcome (Scapes, cuts, broken bones), we have a case of incidental contact.
Is that what we have here? Or is there a penalty for taking up too much real estate by F3. The throw from F5 was on the money, so this is simply a case of positioning by F3.

[WestMichBlue]

If F3's foot is on the orange bag, NO OUT!

Could have a case for interference (Runner staying on feet and crashing into fielder with ball); maybe could find a case for obstruction.

I would go with incidental contact. But not getting the out sends a message to F3 to get the right position in the future - which will minimize future collisions.

WMB

[mcrowder]

One of the most understood parts of OBS (especially by coaches, but some by umpires too) is that the mere act of being in the baseline without the ball is NOT obstruction... not by itself.

The act of being in the baseline without the ball must cause the runner to react in some way for this to be OBS.

On the play you describe, I have nothing as far as OBS / INT.

Also, as noted by WMB (and this is often called wrong too) --- the orange bag, for the fielder, is merely dirt unless the throw is coming from foul ground. Your F3 had both feet on dirt, and never touched 1st base. SAFE!!!

[debeau]

From one of your NZ friends
I agree with both Westmichblue and mccrowder