Don't we all just love questions about OBS?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Dakota

This sounds suspiciously like the discussion some months back about a BR hitting a fly ball into the outfield and being obstructed on the way to 1B and the fly ball was caught. The ASA ruling was, "yeah, well, but we don't want it called that way"... or words to that effect. The NFHS ruling was the same result (BR out) but was illogical as it tried to warp the rules to make it sound like they applied. At least the ASA's "because we say so" was direct. (All of this from memory, and I'm too lazy to go back and look it up.)

I suspect, following the logic ASA used before in ruling that the "between bases" provision does NOT trump all after all, they will want the runner ruled out for a base running infraction not caused by the obstruction. But, who knows?

Right, I should have remembered. But that was more obvious.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

This sounds suspiciously like the discussion some months back about a BR hitting a fly ball into the outfield and being obstructed on the way to 1B and the fly ball was caught. The ASA ruling was, "yeah, well, but we don't want it called that way"... or words to that effect. The NFHS ruling was the same result (BR out) but was illogical as it tried to warp the rules to make it sound like they applied. At least the ASA's "because we say so" was direct. (All of this from memory, and I'm too lazy to go back and look it up.)

I suspect, following the logic ASA used before in ruling that the "between bases" provision does NOT trump all after all, they will want the runner ruled out for a base running infraction not caused by the obstruction. But, who knows?

Aaaaahhhhh......not really! ASA's response was that an obstruction ruling was to nullify the affect of the violation and award any bases to which the OBS runner would have made it had OBS not occurred. Well, on a caught fly ball, the BR would not have reached any base safely had the OBS not occurred. See the May 2007 ASA Rule Clarifications

http://www.asasoftball.com/umpires/c...s_2007_may.asp

[Dakota]

Yeah, I remember now. The problem with that is that the "between the bases" clause DOES trump the "nullify the effect" purpose everywhere else.

Example, a runner attempts to steal 2B, and the throw to F6, who is covering the base, has her dead, but she is obstructed by F4. The result is not to nullify the effect of the obstruction (since that would be to rule her out at 2B, which would have been the result had there been no obstruction), but to invoke the "between the bases" rule and place her back on 1B.

[youngump]

Yeah, so you put her back at home. But that gets awfully annoying for F1 and F2 and the batter. And eventually you end up calling her out for leaving early.
________
Wellbutrin Settlement

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by youngump

Yeah, so you put her back at home. But that gets awfully annoying for F1 and F2 and the batter. And eventually you end up calling her out for leaving early.

Funny, but what about a BR who has bunted, F5 fields the ball, throws to F4 covering 1B and has BR dead, except she has been obstructed by F3 who was charging as the batter showed bunt. "between the bases" trumps and she is placed on 1B. Without obs, BR out. With obs, BR on 1B.

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by Steve M

Mike,
Like Scott said - it makes for a good discussion.
If OBS caused LBR, yeah, I agree with no violation.
But if it's just a LBR, be nice to have an authorized ruling.
Maybe for April or May's interpretations? I think I may check with Luau and see if he's got an opinion we can discuss over a cold drink or 2.

After finishing the day at work and doing a pretty well-played BB game - score of 4-2 with a walk-off 2 run homer. I had a cold drink a talked with Luau - for those who don't know him, he's my state uic. End result is that he agreed that an obstructed runner may not violate another rule - so the obstructed runner who violates the LBR (violation not caused by obstruction) is out.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by Steve M

he's my state uic. End result is that he agreed that an obstructed runner may not violate another rule - so the obstructed runner who violates the LBR (violation not caused by obstruction) is out.

This could get interesting...

I ran this question to our ASA Region UIC and he said "Here is my answer: I am assuming that the runner is still protected by the obstruction rule when the look back rule is violated. I would call the runner out for the look back rule violation as if she had been tagged out. Enforce the obstruction rule since this is not one of the exceptions listed on pg 79 of this years rule book."

He forwarded the question, along with his response, to Kevin Ryan who is on the National Staff to see if he agrees with his interpretation or not. I'll let you know if I get a response.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Steve M

Mike,
Like Scott said - it makes for a good discussion.
If OBS caused LBR, yeah, I agree with no violation.

But if it's just a LBR, be nice to have an authorized ruling.
Maybe for April or May's interpretations? I think I may check with Luau and see if he's got an opinion we can discuss over a cold drink or 2.

Ask and ye shall receive. From May's clarifications, as requested:

Look Back Rule and Obstruction

We have received a play that involved obstruction and the look back rule in the same play. In this play a runner was obstructed between two bases and then violated the look back rule.

Play: With one out and R1 on 2B, B3 hits the ball to shallow left field for a base hit. R1 runs toward 3B but gets obstructed by F6. R1 stumbles and falls to the ground as F7 throws the ball back to F1 in the eight foot circle. R1 now gets up starts toward 3B but sees the pitcher with the ball in the circle. R1 then starts back to 2B and now sees B3 standing on 2B and changes directions again and starts back toward 3B. The umpire calls dead for R1 violating Rule 8 section 7T The Look Back Rule.

Ruling: The base umpire should have called "obstruction" and signaled a delayed dead ball when R1 was impeded by F6. When R1 violated the Look Back Rule, the umpire should call a "dead ball" and awarded R1 the base(s) that in the umpire's judgment, R1 would have reached, had there been no obstruction. Rule 8, Section 5B[1] on page 79 has five exceptions which allow the runner to be called out between the base they were obstructed. The Look Back Rule is NOT one of these exceptions.