Not another obstruction thread

[SC Ump]

... it's a question about the trailing runner.

NFHS: R1 on 1B, 2 outs, F5 fields ball and throws to F3. The ball is overthrown and F9 is not backing up. I believe R1 will make it home easily, but collides with F6 and falls down. I (PU) immediately call and signal obstruction. The BU was following BR and the play on the overthrow.

As R1 gets up and gets to 3B easily, the coach says, "just stay here, you'll be awarded home." As much as I'm tempted to NOT award at this point... (is there a penalty for not trying?) I do award home at the end of the playing action.

After that, I'm thinking what about the BR now at 2B? No one asked or questioned that runner and she stayed at 2B.

I do not know what happened with BR as she rounded first... Did she run to right field and then go to 2B? Did she round and immediately go? Did she hesitate because of obstruction on R1 by F6?

I started realizing, I often don't considered trailing runners when noting obstruction. If the BR hesitated when R1 and F6 collided and thus did not make it to 3B because of that collision, I'm thinking that the incident thus obstructed BR, too, and the proper award would be for BR to be at 3B, even though she "chose" to not advance because of the obstruction, i.e. she was not physically obstructed.

Thoughts?

[IRISHMAFIA]

... it's a question about the trailing runner.

NFHS: R1 on 1B, 2 outs, F5 fields ball and throws to F3. The ball is overthrown and F9 is not backing up. I believe R1 will make it home easily, but collides with F6 and falls down. I (PU) immediately call and signal obstruction. The BU was following BR and the play on the overthrow.

As R1 gets up and gets to 3B easily, the coach says, "just stay here, you'll be awarded home." As much as I'm tempted to NOT award at this point... (is there a penalty for not trying?) I do award home at the end of the playing action.

Which you should since you already noted that is the base she would have reached had the OBS not occurred.

After that, I'm thinking what about the BR now at 2B? No one asked or questioned that runner and she stayed at 2B.

I do not know what happened with BR as she rounded first... Did she run to right field and then go to 2B? Did she round and immediately go? Did she hesitate because of obstruction on R1 by F6?

I started realizing, I often don't considered trailing runners when noting obstruction. If the BR hesitated when R1 and F6 collided and thus did not make it to 3B because of that collision, I'm thinking that the incident thus obstructed BR, too, and the proper award would be for BR to be at 3B, even though she "chose" to not advance because of the obstruction, i.e. she was not physically obstructed.

Thoughts?

How do you know she didn't stop because the coach said to stop? This would most likely be the BU's call. If that umpire recognized that the OBS affected the runner, then the award could be made.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by SC Ump

... If the BR hesitated when R1 and F6 collided and thus did not make it to 3B because of that collision, I'm thinking that the incident thus obstructed BR, too, and the proper award would be for BR to be at 3B, even though she "chose" to not advance because of the obstruction, i.e. she was not physically obstructed.Thoughts?

How was BR obstructed...she wasn't? No one obstructed her, she stopped or hesitated at her own risk. You just have to go with what she made on her own, leave her at 2B. Or at least that's my opinion.

EDITED: After a 2nd thought on this, aren't the "other runners" only given the bases the umpire thought they would have made, if the obstructed runner is called out? In this case the obstructed runner (R1) was never called out therefore isn't the BR a moot point as far as any award?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dholloway1962

How was BR obstructed...she wasn't? No one obstructed her, she stopped or hesitated at her own risk. You just have to go with what she made on her own, leave her at 2B. Or at least that's my opinion.

EDITED: After a 2nd thought on this, aren't the "other runners" only given the bases the umpire thought they would have made, if the obstructed runner is called out? In this case the obstructed runner (R1) was never called out therefore isn't the BR a moot point as far as any award?

Don't know about Fed, but ASA (which I would think is similar). ALL runners affected by an obstruction are awarded the bases which, in the umpire's judgment, they would had obtained had the OBS not occurred.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Don't know about Fed, but ASA (which I would think is similar). ALL runners affected by an obstruction are awarded the bases which, in the umpire's judgment, they would had obtained had the OBS not occurred.

It is the same in Fed.

[CecilOne]

It basically boils down to what Irish said: "umpire recognized that the OBS affected the runner".

[[email protected]]

I'm thinking you could put the B/R on third using this logic:

A. If the runner had gone home cleanly, there would have been a play at the plate, giving the B/R the opportunity to go to third. Of course, then you get into whether she could have gotten there safely.

B. She could not, because of how the play ended up after the obstruction, take third because someone else was there.

Don't know, seems a bit of a stretch, but HTBT.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by [email protected]

I'm thinking you could put the B/R on third using this logic:

A. If the runner had gone home cleanly, there would have been a play at the plate, giving the B/R the opportunity to go to third. Of course, then you get into whether she could have gotten there safely.

B. She could not, because of how the play ended up after the obstruction, take third because someone else was there.

Don't know, seems a bit of a stretch, but HTBT.

It is one he!! of a stretch, since we are NOT to consider subsequent play as part of the recognition of the affect to a runner.

[[email protected]]

Steve, I agree. I was thinking you'd have to make that decision at the time of the obstruction and its immediate impact. Very difficult to judge all the possible and probable results. So my posting was intended more theoretical than practical. Should have said so.

[SC Ump]

Originally Posted by SC Ump

(1) ... As much as I'm tempted to NOT award at this point...

(2) No one asked or questioned that runner and she stayed at 2B.

(3) I started realizing, I often don't considered trailing runners when noting obstruction.

Thanks for everyone's input. It confirms what I thought. Here's some additional thoughts about my original post.

(1) Not a suggestion to others, but only a tongue-in-cheek remark about how I hate those coaches that try to make the call before you do. They seem to think they are going to influence you... like the first base coach that yells, "SAFE" on everything the least bit close.

(2) Thinking it over afterwards, I should have perhaps discussed with partner where we should place the BR. I only awarded R1. I was planning to discuss BR with partner if anyone ask, but no one asked. An inning or so later, he asked about the OBS; he had his back turned to the runner and did not even realize what had happened. This might just be one of those few items that get missed in a two ump system. I'm sure next time I will note position of all affected runners.

(3) This is the first time I can remember that for me there was a consideration of a trailing runner on an OBS. Discussing it with you folks will make me more confident the next time.

Thanks,

[bkbjones]

Wait a minute...

didn't you say you were the PU? If so, then how the heck could your partner not see what happened. I mean, BU is kinda sorta responsible for that ol' B/R all the way to third, right? Not saying that you, as PU, shouldn't call obstruction, because you gotta call it when you see it.

[DaveASA/FED]

BK,
I believe that the OBS was focused on the R1 as he/she rounded 2nd and collided with F6, the lead runner with the BU having the BR would become the PU's call, the BU was sticking with the BR who was now moving from 1st to 2nd after the overthrow at 1. So the BU would probably not see very well an OBS call past 2nd if they were focused on the play at 1st base and then transitioning into the infield for a possible play at 2nd. I think this is the point from the OP that there could have been an award of 3rd to the BR based on the OBS of R1....but who picks that up? Both are trying to watch it all, but PU is focused on R1 and BU is focused on BR (R2).

Like others have said it is a HTBT play, but if you have R1 at 3rd and R2(BR) at 2nd and they still haven't got the ball back in I think you could sell the fact that the OBS effected R2's position and award 3rd when you award R1 home, but again that is a HTBT to see the situation.

[SC Ump]

Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED

... the BU was sticking with the BR who was now moving from 1st to 2nd after the overthrow at 1...

... you are correct as far as I know. Since the collision of R1 and F6 happened about one step past 2B, I believe that at the time the BU, who started the play in the "B" position, probably had his back to 2B and was watching the overthown ball to ensure it did not go into DBT.