How would you rule this obstruction call?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by MountieSB

Thanks for your responses. It sounds like I wasn't off base for questioning the call. My only concern was that he used the words "in my judgement" well after the play was over. It was as if he realized he wasn't quite sure what to do, and then rationalized the decision later. We have all had moments where we have a brain cramp on a ruling (God knows I have!), and this could have been one of those situations. He's a good umpire. I just wished we could have talked about it before he ruled so firmly.

But coach, the award from an obstruction call IS a judgment call. Of course he's going to be firm, because regardless of how you might feel about it, it's his judgment that determines the call. Just like the strike zone, safe/out, etc., an obstruction award is his judgment. He's not rationalizing anything. Why does there need to be a conversation on his judgment, coach?

The only sticking point I have is that he says he had her protected to 3B, so I'm curious to know why he didn't award 3B. If he had her protected to 2B instead, then yes, she would have been out for attempting to advance beyond the base to which she was protected. Yet if he had her protected to 3B, then she should have been awarded 3B.