I understand what a fake tag is and its repercussions.

Im not asking about a fake tag, im asking about a defender doing an act to intentionally deceive the runner that is not clearly explained in the rules.

Ppl are saying a defender can do anything they want besides physically obstruct the runner or fake tag, but the definition of OBS says a defender who hinders or impedes.

why doesnt deceiving the runner fall under the definition of hinder or impede?

Because umpires are not the 10th man on the field for the defense. A lot of weaker teams and coaches look for a little "hook me up" to supplement their lack of coaching, skill, player ability, and training; aint happening.

Because generally attempted deception is an inherent part of the game. Let's take your argument to the outrageously end of the world degree.

R1 on 3rd, B2 hits grounder to F5. F5 fakes a throw to first, drawing R1 toward home, then tags out R1. Clearly, the fake throw deceived R1.

Now, answer your own question, Shane. Does(n't) deceiving the runner fall under the definition of hinder or impede? Are you ready to call this play obstruction?

I would like to assume you would consider this an outrageous misapplication of the rule. If you do, then the only next question is where do you draw the line between acceptable deception and unacceptable deception?

The rule book makes clear that a fake tag is a specific unacceptable deception; and most would agree that the likely unsafe and unhealthy reaction of runners is the rationale. I submit you use that thought process as your guide; if the deception of the defense puts the runner at a physical risk, you should (at least potentially) consider it obstruction. If the deception runs closer to gamesmanship, it is an acceptable part of the game.

thanks for a well written and apparently correct answer.