Don't we all just love questions about OBS?

[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.