Need some input on this sitch. Be gentle, since this is my first post. LOL
Please use ASA references.
Sitch: Runner on 2nd. Batter safely hits to left field. Runner on 2nd is obstructed by shortstop on her way to 3rd. Left fielder comes up firing to 3rd and there is a close play. Runner slides, touches bag & beats the tag but her slide takes her past the bag and she loses contact with bag. Runner is re-tagged while off the bag.
What is the call?
Some of my brothers & sisters in blue say the runner is out since she acquired the base (3rd) she would have been awarded and went beyond. The others say they would keep her on 3rd (due to the obstruction) since the runner did not make an "attempt to advance" past the protected base (3rd)

thanks for playing
 

Welcome to the board. Don't have rule book with me so i can't cite the rules.

Runner out, plain and simple. Umpire had her protected to third, she obtained it, she was no longer in between the bases where she was obstructed, she's out.

-Josh

I got an out.

The runner may not have meant to go past the base, but she did therefore an attempt.

ASA 8-5-B-3;
If the obstructed runner is put out after passing the base which would have been reached had there not been obstruction OR RAN BEYOND THE TWO BASES THE OBSTRUCTION OCCURED, the obstructed runner will be called out. The ball remains alive.

A slide past a base is the same as running beyond.

Devil's Advocate
 

The runner was placed in the position of needing to slide, because of the obstruction. A case could be made in this case that the phrase "ran beyond the two bases the obstruction occurred" means ran and that sliding should not be considered the same.

This maybe stated that way to protect the player that makes a slide after being obstructed because they dont know that they are "protected" as it were.

In this case were we going to award any other bases for the obstruction?

A case could be made to say that she should still be safe at 3B.

The defense should not benefit from an action the offense to do something they would not have normally done had not been obstructed.

In your situation I would have an out also, but I may rule differently depending on how close to the bag the obstruction took place and if that may have had an influence on the runner sliding past the bag.

Example, 3B obstructs the runner about two feet from third base. The runner, in trying to avoid the collision which is their responsibility, has to slide past third and reach out with a hand to grab the base. Runner gets the base but can't hold on and is then tagged, I probably wouldn't have an out here as the obstruction was a main cause of the runner sliding past the base.

Go ahead and correct me.. :)

Thanks for your replies.
FYI - I had the same call (an out)
I think some of my fellow umps are being to literal when it says "ran" beyond the two bases (ASA 8-5-B3), since the runner was sliding.

those that are taking WHY she had to slide into consideration have a pretty good point...by book once she reaches where she would have reached, the obstruction is over...but if u can sell the slide being the result.....have at it

Some are sounding like coaches out there.

Read the rule and move your thumb :)

"If the obstruced runner is put out after passing the base which would have been reached had there not been obstruction OR"

Yes, that reads "OR", not AND.

The runner passed the base. The rule does not require the OBS runn ro run "beyond" the base, just pass it.

And before someone wants to argue the definition of passing a base, look at it this way. If the runner which overslid a base after touching it got up and proceeded to the next base, would you require them to retouch the base where the overslide took place? Of course, you wouldn't. Or, at least, I hope you wouldn't ;)

This is an out. Those trying to sell the "she made me slide" theory may believe they are doing the correct thing, but I don't believe there is much support in the rules to back it up.

Mike - I have an out in most sitches too...

But take a case where the runner was forced to run around F6 and completely missed third base because of it (perhaps to the inside, so that she landed on the 3BL between 3rd and home). Or take a case where the OBS was CONTACT by F6 which caused her to stumble and/or fall past third base.

Would you place these runners on 3rd? I believe I would.

Not trying to sell it, just saying that it is a possibility and there are times where the spirit of the rule rather than the letter of the rule is important.

If the runner had voluntarily rounded 3rd and got put out trying to return - I call an out. Some of this is judgement and if the runner was forced into a situation because of an obstruction I am giving that player the benefit of the doubt (if in my judgement it is warranted).

In most instances an out would be the appropriate call. Im just saying that sometimes we have to use our judgement in some situations and make decisions based on the "you had to be there to see it" moment.

It sounds from the original post that the obs. happened partway between second and third base. In this situation, I am going to call an out if she obtains the base and goes past it (whether voluntarily or by oversliding). She has had time to recover from the OBS, she reached the base I was protecting her to and she is no longer between the bases where she was obstructed between. Now, if I've got obstruction right around third base (player blocking the base before ball gets there for example) and the runner is forced due to the obstruction to slide around and she touches the base but overslides it or misses it altogether, then I'll probably call her safe, but only if the act of oversliding is a direct result from the obstruction. When she's obstructed half way to third base, I can't tell if the overslide is a direct result of the obstruction or not, tough break. JMO

-Josh

I agree the Initial post was a pretty clear out call.

But it does raise the interesting corollary.

Note, however, that in your sitch, with OBS right ON the base, that R2 is still OBS'd when she passes 3rd - and CAN then be protected between 3rd and home within the actual words of the rule.

The question still to be asked is --- should we (and can we) protect a runner who was obviously OBS'd between 2nd and 3rd when the OBS caused an overslide or overrun past 3rd base? (And by 'caused', I mean in the umpire's clear judgement).

In the original sitch. I agree with the out call and would have made the same. I was just bringing up what I think is a little gray area that may need to be looked into. Letter of the law, the runner is out. I just have a tough time rewarding the defense for something that was caused by their breaking of a rule.

I think the "forced slide" is possibly an issue if the OBS occurs right at the base.
I think it is unlikely that a runner would slide rather than stumble, take extra steps or trip if s/he had not intended to slide anyway.
But that does not resolve the question, it just changes it to falling/stumbling past the base. Or is that different? I think so.

It might be moot anyway as most seemed to agree that the Japanese runner tagged out at home in the WC Final was not obstructed as she slid 3-4 feet to the side of the plat trying to avoid the U.S.A. catcher.

How did the defense cause the runner to pass the base?

Even if the player went into a slide that may not have occurred had there been no obstruction, the runner is still responsible to know how to slide properly and keep contact with a base.

So, now you are rewarding the offense for a runner being incapable of performing a controlled slide.