Obstruction ruling

[youngump]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I
If/when an obstructed runner is put out between the bases obstructed, or prior to the protected base (the test is BOTH, not either/or)

That clause reads a little ambiguously. My natural reading would be to describe the test as one or the other but not both. To make sure we're on the same page:

R1 obstructed between 1st and 2nd but only protected to first. Dead ball if tagged anywhere behind 2nd (prior to the protected base means up to 1st [though why they'd retreat is beyond me] / between the obstructed bases means up to second)

R1 obstructed between 1st and 2nd but protected to third. Dead ball if tagged anywhere behind 2nd (prior to the protected base gets them all the way to third).

That sound right?
________
Web Shows

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by youngump

That clause reads a little ambiguously. My natural reading would be to describe the test as one or the other but not both. To make sure we're on the same page:

R1 obstructed between 1st and 2nd but only protected to first. Dead ball if tagged anywhere behind 2nd (prior to the protected base means up to 1st [though why they'd retreat is beyond me] / between the obstructed bases means up to second)

R1 obstructed between 1st and 2nd but protected to third. Dead ball if tagged anywhere behind 2nd (prior to the protected base gets them all the way to third).

That sound right?

Here's what I was trying to say, without being overly wordy. If obstructed between 1st and 2nd, cannot be out (other than book exceptions) between 1st and 2nd, no matter how far you are protecting, be it 1st, 2nd, or 3rd. Umpires seem to forget that runners can overrun protection (if only protected to first on obstruction between 1st and 2nd, for example) and STILL be protected between 1st and 2nd, even if they return safely to 1st, and then take off again during the same play sequence. Both forms of protection are STILL intact, and the "between two bases" protection is only negated if there is an interim play on ANOTHER runner (again, excepting the missed base, interference, or passing another runner).

rwest, there is, to my knowledge, no written direction to use the halfway standard; but, when I have asked NUS members, that is the direction I have been given, in order to fairly NOT penalize the other runners who are actively attempting to advance when the obstructed runner is apparently put out. More than halfway, one can assume they would likely have been able to advance, less than halfway, then no. Since it isn't (to my knowledge) a written directive, I suspect one should also use his judgment regarding an obviously slow or obviously quick runner, that may or may not have advanced safely. Our job there is to use our best judgment to negate the effect of the obstruction.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Up to and including the 2004 POEs on Obstruction:

"If other runners are advancing when an umpire calls time following a play on an obstructed runner, a rule of thumb for placement of the other runners is: If they have not reached half way to the next base, they must return to the previous base. However, if they have advanced over half way, they are allowed to advance to the next base."

If recollection serves me correctly, at that point it was considered redundant as they wanted the umpire's judgment to determine where to place runners affected by the OBS call and stopping an advancing runner due to killing the ball to rule on an obstruction did affect the runner advancing at the time.