Obstruction question

[JPhanatic]

Batter hits gapper and is heading for an easy stand up double. The first baseman for some reason goes to the inside of the bag right in the path of the runner.
Runner stutter steps and makes contact with first baseman as he rounds bag and after being taken off stride by contact just rounds the bag and decides not to try and advance to second base.
Umpire had arm out indicating obstruction but did not award runner second base because he did not attempt to take second base.
Umpire told runner after play that he had to keep going, and if thrown out would have been ruled safe due to obstruction.
Is this the right call?

[NCASAUmp]

Yes and no. It's left up to the umpire's judgment to determine where the runner WOULD have safely reached had there been no obstruction. The runner does not need to make an attempt to advance towards a particular base in order to be awarded that base. However, the umpire is correct in saying that IF the umpire felt they would have gotten 2nd base, and IF the runner tried for 2nd base, but got tagged out, the runner would simply be placed on 2nd base.

[kcg NC2Ablu]

Originally Posted by JPhanatic

Batter hits gapper and is heading for an easy stand up double. The first baseman for some reason goes to the inside of the bag right in the path of the runner.
Runner stutter steps and makes contact with first baseman as he rounds bag and after being taken off stride by contact just rounds the bag and decides not to try and advance to second base.
Umpire had arm out indicating obstruction but did not award runner second base because he did not attempt to take second base.
Umpire told runner after play that he had to keep going, and if thrown out would have been ruled safe due to obstruction.
Is this the right call?

Well lets take it step by step ... the base umpire has obs no argument there... as the runner goes back into first the umpire doesnt award the base (second) so it seems to me the base umpire had the runner protected to 1st so to answer the rest of the op .. by rule a runner cannot be put out between the two bases which that runner was obstructed so since it seems as if the runner was protected just to first if the runner was to attempt for second and be put out dead ball obstruction runner goes back to first. Then be prepd to explain why the runner isnt out to one coach and why the runner doesnt get 2nd to the other.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by JPhanatic

...but did not award runner second base because he did not attempt to take second base.
Umpire told runner after play that he had to keep going {to be awarded second}...

But, of course, the above part is a wrong application of the rule (with the part in brackets my finishing of what I am reading the statement to mean).

If, in fact, the first part is the reason the umpire did not award second, and if, in fact, the umpire said the second sentence, the umpire was incorrect.

[DaveASA/FED]

You are right Tom, and that is actually a misapplication of the rule and could be protested. Not that I would reccommend it, as the BU could say IMJ that runner was only going to get first based on the play and there is no longer an arguement, but if they continued to say they had to try for second to get second it is a misapplication of the rules.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by kcg NC2Ablu

Well lets take it step by step ... the base umpire has obs no argument there... as the runner goes back into first the umpire doesnt award the base (second) so it seems to me the base umpire had the runner protected to 1st so to answer the rest of the op .. by rule a runner cannot be put out between the two bases which that runner was obstructed so since it seems as if the runner was protected just to first if the runner was to attempt for second and be put out dead ball obstruction runner goes back to first. Then be prepd to explain why the runner isnt out to one coach and why the runner doesnt get 2nd to the other.

I would agree if the umpire did not tell the runner he would have ruled him safe if he proceeded to 2B. To me, that would be an indication the umpire believed the runner would have safely reached 2B had the OBS not occured. That is also an indication the umpire does not know the rule or how to apply it.

[kcg NC2Ablu]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I would agree if the umpire did not tell the runner he would have ruled him safe if he proceeded to 2B. To me, that would be an indication the umpire believed the runner would have safely reached 2B had the OBS not occured. That is also an indication the umpire does not know the rule or how to apply it.

ok and I would agree if I saw that in the op. If the umpire thought that the runner would have gotten 2b it shouldve been awarded even if the runner isnt put out.