Obstruction ruling

[Roger Greene]

Mike,

I would point out Fed 8-4-3 again
"ART.3...A runner is entitled to advance without liability to be put out when:
a. (...)
EFFECT:(...)
b. a fielder not in possession of the ball(...)impedes the progress of a runner(...)"

The penalty portion then explains how to place the runner, and specifically states that the runner can not be put out between the two bases where they are obstructed.

I wish that Article 3 said the runner is entitled to advance or retreat instead of just advance.

I just don't beleive that the rules permit us to declare obstruction (an illegal act by the defense) occured and then say that we protect the runner for 20 feet and she is out of luck because she is 25 feet from the closest base. The statement in paragraph 1 of the Penalty clause "An obstructed runner may not be called out between the two bases where they were obstructed unless properly appealed for missing a base, leaving a base before a fly ball was first touched, for an act of interference, or if passing another runner" doesn't offer the option of making an obstruction award less than the next base or last base touched.

We might get into the 20 feet opposed to 25 feet if she attempted to advance an additional base, or retreated beyond the last base for some strange reason.

If the runner is just rounding the base, or feinting toward the next base, I think you can judge that there was no legitimate attempt to advance, and without an attempt to be a runner who is "leagally running the bases" you may ignore the incident and state that no obsruction occured.

As far as my opinion of the runner not haveing a prayer, I've been fooled before. After all I got married in '73 and voted for Nixon in '72! (big G)

Roger Greene

[Edited by Roger Greene on Jan 30th, 2002 at 02:25 AM]