Another obstruction call

[Ran.D]

Thanks guys........appears I was not only out of position, but blew the call on the BR. Fortunately, the game was not close.

[umpharp]

you wern't out of position as long as you and your partner talked about when you might go out before hand.
I do think that R2 should have been given second with R1 given third.
Any complaining from either team on the play?

[Ran.D]

Neither team complained, the trip was obvious.

Interestingly, I had a game with the same partner last night and brought up that we may have missed the call.

Not only did he disagree with awarding R2 second, we ran it by another crew and they didn't think she should get second either.

Their argument "only the obstructed runner is awarded a base, coach should have brought R1 to third."

So, "affected by the obstruction" seems to be a judgement call??

[celebur]

Excuse me if I'm going on a tangent, but this is a learning moment for me.

What would happen if BR was tagged out before getting back to 1B? Do you have an out? Or do you protect him because he was affected by the obstruction?

Thanks in advance. . .

[bigsig]

Technically, the other crews are correct that obstruction only effects the obstructed runner, however, in my opinion we should consider the intent of this rule. It is intended to insure that the defense doesn't get an unfair advantage by hindering base runners. With that in mind, did the defense get an advantage when the BR was kept on 1B? It sounds like they did.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by bigsig

Technically, the other crews are correct that obstruction only effects the obstructed runner, however, in my opinion we should consider the intent of this rule. It is intended to insure that the defense doesn't get an unfair advantage by hindering base runners. With that in mind, did the defense get an advantage when the BR was kept on 1B? It sounds like they did.

Technically, perhaps a re-read of the rule for you is also in order. You have the intent of the rule right, but not the "technically" part apparently.

Envision a play with R1, BR hits it to the wall. R1 trips over F3 and twists an ankle, laying in the basepath. BR cannot pass R1, so stays at first on what you deem to be a clear double or even triple. BY RULE, you place any runners affected by the obstruction on the bases you deem appropriate, including in this case, BR - even though BR was no obstructed.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by bigsig

Technically, the other crews are correct that obstruction only effects the obstructed runner, however, in my opinion we should consider the intent of this rule. It is intended to insure that the defense doesn't get an unfair advantage by hindering base runners. With that in mind, did the defense get an advantage when the BR was kept on 1B? It sounds like they did.

Speaking ASA

Technically, the other crews are incorrect.

8.5.B.4.Effect: The obstructed runner and all other runners shall always be awarded the base or bases which would have been reached, in the umpire's judgment, had there been no obstruction.

This is also clearly covered in POE #36.

The rule and POE clearly permit state that all runners affected by the obstruction are to be awarded the base each would have attained had the obstruction not occured. There is no judgment as to the intent of the rule necessary, just where to place the runner(s).

[WestMichBlue]

Originally Posted by celebur

Excuse me if I'm going on a tangent, but this is a learning moment for me.

What would happen if BR was tagged out before getting back to 1B? Do you have an out? Or do you protect him because he was affected by the obstruction?

Do you see a difference between a runner being put in jepordy by an act of obstruction, and the following runner being put in jepordy by the action of the obstructed runner?

I do not. I feel that the following runner is, in essence, also obstructed, and thus is protected from being put out. I would use 8-5.B.4 quoted above to support that position.

WMB

Not only is the obstructed runner afforded protection but all runners affected are to be given protection. I don't have my rulebook but I am almost 100% sure on this one. R2 should be on 2nd IMHO.

[celebur]

Originally Posted by WestMichBlue

Do you see a difference between a runner being put in jepordy by an act of obstruction, and the following runner being put in jepordy by the action of the obstructed runner?

I do not. I feel that the following runner is, in essence, also obstructed, and thus is protected from being put out. I would use 8-5.B.4 quoted above to support that position.

Eureka! I think I need to expand my definition of obstruction. Thanks for explaining it this way. Fortunately, I've never had it happen (yet) in a game.

[WestMichBlue]

Originally Posted by Ran.D

Their argument "only the obstructed runner is awarded a base, coach should have brought R1 to third."

So, "affected by the obstruction" seems to be a judgement call??

Not at all - it is a rule. And you need to ask your partner and the other crew to read ASA 8-5.B.4 which contains the following sentence:

"the obstructed runner and each other runner affected by the obstruction, will always be awarded the base or bases which would have been reached, in the umpire's judgment, had there been no obstruction."

WMB

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Ran.D

Their argument "only the obstructed runner is awarded a base, coach should have brought R1 to third."

Then your boys need to re-read the rule. It specifically states the opposite.