Triple checking, AGAIN

[Chess Ref]

It was a pretty basic call on my part but I just really want to check that I was correct. My reasoning for checking is coach and partner both thought I handled it wrong. I think I handled it right.

I am PU on this play.

R1 on 2b. Routine ground ball to F4. R1 moving to 3b. As R1 approaches 3b the F5 gets in her way. I hold my hand out and announce "Obstruction." It was pretty much a formality as the runner wasn't going anywhere else and in my mind the penalty was " she's protected to 3B. The coach then tells her to run home, F1 has the ball now,and tosses it the catcher and they get the runner by 10 feet. I have an out. Coach said runner should get home due to the OBS. I tell coach I had the runner protected to 3B and no more.

Everyone moved on and after game my BU agreed with the coach.

Please tell me I'm not missing something here and that I'm learning my lessons around here.

[MNBlue]

Sounds right to me. It goes back to what Mike has stated so often; the coaches should coach as if there had been no obstruction, and not try to guess what the award will be. Let the umpires do their job after the play becomes dead.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by Chess Ref

It was a pretty basic call on my part but I just really want to check that I was correct. My reasoning for checking is coach and partner both thought I handled it wrong. I think I handled it right.

I am PU on this play.

R1 on 2b. Routine ground ball to F4. R1 moving to 3b. As R1 approaches 3b the F5 gets in her way. I hold my hand out and announce "Obstruction." It was pretty much a formality as the runner wasn't going anywhere else and in my mind the penalty was " she's protected to 3B. The coach then tells her to run home, F1 has the ball now,and tosses it the catcher and they get the runner by 10 feet. I have an out. Coach said runner should get home due to the OBS. I tell coach I had the runner protected to 3B and no more.

Everyone moved on and after game my BU agreed with the coach.

Please tell me I'm not missing something here and that I'm learning my lessons around here.

So the runner was obstructed between second and third, correct? And you felt that the runner would not have achieved home had there not been obstruction, right? If you answered yes to both of these, then you, sir, are correct in your ruling.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Chess Ref

It was a pretty basic call on my part but I just really want to check that I was correct. My reasoning for checking is coach and partner both thought I handled it wrong. I think I handled it right.

I am PU on this play.

R1 on 2b. Routine ground ball to F4. R1 moving to 3b. As R1 approaches 3b the F5 gets in her way. I hold my hand out and announce "Obstruction." It was pretty much a formality as the runner wasn't going anywhere else and in my mind the penalty was " she's protected to 3B. The coach then tells her to run home, F1 has the ball now,and tosses it the catcher and they get the runner by 10 feet. I have an out. Coach said runner should get home due to the OBS. I tell coach I had the runner protected to 3B and no more.

Everyone moved on and after game my BU agreed with the coach.

Please tell me I'm not missing something here and that I'm learning my lessons around here.

Yeah, what the other guys said.

You made the right call and I hope someone doesn't come on here and tell you, "but if she could have made home" since you have already stated that "in your judgment" she could not and that is the ONLY opinion that counts!

[Bluefoot]

Wait a minute.

A base runner who has been awarded a base for being obstructed can not be put out bewteen the bases for which she was obstructed.

If she was obstructed and awarded 3B, how can she be put out between 3B and HP if she is between one of the bases that she was obstructed? That goes against the OBS award.

Shouldn't the play have been ruled dead when she was tagged, and the runner put back on 3B?

[SRW]

Originally Posted by Bluefoot

Wait a minute.

A base runner who has been awarded a base for being obstructed can not be put out bewteen the bases for which she was obstructed.

If she was obstructed and awarded 3B, how can she be put out between 3B and HP if she is between one of the bases that she was obstructed? That goes against the OBS award.

Shouldn't the play have been ruled dead when she was tagged, and the runner put back on 3B?

Before you start bolding text and 'waiting a minute', perhaps you should go back and re-read the OP.

The runner was OBS'd between 2B and 3B, not 3B and HP.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by SRW

Before you start bolding text and 'waiting a minute', perhaps you should go back and re-read the OP.

The runner was OBS'd between 2B and 3B, not 3B and HP.

Don't worry, he doesn't need to know the rules, he has thick skin

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Don't worry, he doesn't need to know the rules, he has thick skin

With his acute understanding of the strike zone and handling catchers showing up umpires by having a thick skin, it didnt leave much time to study up on obstruction.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Don't worry, he doesn't need to know the rules, he has thick skin

I will learn to stop eating while I am on the computer. Thanks, Mike.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by Bluefoot

Wait a minute.

A base runner who has been awarded a base for being obstructed can not be put out bewteen the bases for which she was obstructed.

If she was obstructed and awarded 3B, how can she be put out between 3B and HP if she is between one of the bases that she was obstructed? That goes against the OBS award.

Shouldn't the play have been ruled dead when she was tagged, and the runner put back on 3B?

Nice try. But actually, the rule reads:

An obstructed runner may not be called out between the two bases where she was obstructed unless one of the following occurs:
1. The obstructed runner, after being obstructed, safely obtains the base
she would have been awarded, in the umpire’s judgment, had there
been no obstruction and there is a subsequent play on a different
runner. The obstructed runner is no longer protected if she leaves the
base.
2. When another violation is being played upon.
A.R. 9-3c2. A runner who leaves second base too soon on a touched fly ball is returning
after the ball is caught and is obstructed between second and third base. If the runner
would not have returned safely to second base before the throw arriving, she would
remain out.
3. The obstructed runner commits an act of interference.
4. The obstructed runner passes another runner.
5. A proper appeal is made for leaving a base before a fly ball was first
touched.
6. A proper appeal is made for missing a base.

So, as you can see, when the OBS occurred between second and third base, those were the bases that the runner could not be put out between, unless of course any of the above criteria allowed for it.

The OP stated that in his mind the runner was going no further than third as a result of the OBS. Therefore, in his judgement, third is all that she is entitled to. If she advances, then she does so at her own risk.

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Nice try. But actually, the rule reads:

The OP stated that in his mind the runner was going no further than third as a result of the OBS. Therefore, in his judgement, third is all that she is entitled to. If she advances, then she does so at her own risk.

That, in a nutshell, is exactly what happened.

I'm relatively new to umpiring,less than 5 years, and I work with LOTS of more experienced blues. I want to believe that they must know more then me. But,*sigh*, I'm finding out alot of them don't.....

[SRW]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Don't worry, he doesn't need to know the rules, he has thick skin

Good point.