Awarding bases on obstruction

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Simple enough to make the award; too bad it flies against the conventional standards of all major organizations (ISF/ASA/NCAA/NFHS). I don't think we should have rules based solely on what is easiest to award.

To YoungUmp: I don't believe we need to be 100% sure that a runner would safely attain a base. If there is valid reason to judge it was reasonably possible, we need to award that base. To do otherwise is to effectively reward the defense for violating a rule.

Absolutely, 100%, no doubt about it, the God of finger could not stop the runner from getting there, sure.......no, you don't need to be THAT convinced. However, you, as the umpire, should believe that the runner would have reached that base to which you are protecting him/her had the obstruction not occurred. And that should be your only measure. I.E., if you protect a runner to 3B and s/he passes that base and is thrown out at home, she is OUT! Don't care if it was 40' or 4', the runner is OUT!