Obstruction - Rounding the bag
 

Runner at first. Ground ball (bunt). Out at first. R1 rounds bag a 2nd with no intention or opportunity to take 3rd. Contact is made with shortstop on 3rd base side of second base. Runner retreats back to 2nd. There is no throw or play. Base umpire does not rule obstruction.

While ball is still live, 3rd base coach tells runner to come over to 3rd base because of obstruction. Runner leaves second and starts strolling towards 3rd. Defense tags her out easily. Offensive coach protests that there was obstruction and that he thought the ump had extended his arm signalling obstruction. Umpire states that he was not signalling obstruction.

Coach and umpire defer to HP Umpire.

Result - Runner is awarded third. Was this the right call?

NO!

Coaches don't award bases, umpires do. Even if an umpire DID have an arm up, it's not an automatic award, in this case, it was likely only protection.

You don't mention what's going on with the ball when the runner returns. If the ball was in the circle, the runner returned to 2nd and then left when the coach told her to, we have an out - no need to play on her. If not, we merely have a live ball.

IF one of the umpires had obstruction on the shortstop (and it could be PU - both umpires can call this), at most the runner would be protected and put back on 2nd (based on your description of the play, obviously). But if that were the case, PU needed to make the call upon the tag, not after discussion.

The only other thing here might be if the BU was a rookie - and when conferring with PU told him what he saw - and it WAS obstruction, he just didn't know what to do with it. Even in that case, the award of 3rd sounds way wrong.

From your description, it was obstruction, but the proper base award would be 2B (unless the rules you were playing under require a minimum of 1 base award for OBS). But, of course, I'm only going by your description, and the base award is umpire judgment.

The BU should have signaled OBS even if the runner did not appear to be going anywhere. That would have prevented SOME of the drama, at least.

Neither umpire would be considered a rookie. Ball was still live, in the hands of the first baseman. The runner went backed to second and was called to third by her coach. As soon as the runner started towards 3rd, she threw the ball to 3rd and runner was tagged out.

What rule set?

CASA - Canadian

Then sounds like you have OBS between 2nd and 3rd, so she's protected between those bases - when tagged, since the award was not likely 3rd, she probably belongs on 2nd.

That said, I'm basing this on the softball rulesets I know. I believe there's at least 1 baseball set that the award would be 3rd - and I don't know CASA's nuances - so 3rd COULD have been right in their code.

I'm picking nits here, maybe, but did you mean to say that the BU should have signaled a Delayed Dead Ball? ;)

Bite me. ;)

The true debate on this is does the PU call obstruction are does the PU just mentally note the obstruction and then if asked by the BU give the information. (Based on OP the runner should have been placed at 2nd).

We all know the book says either blue can make the call. However, I know a few blues (one that is pretty high up in ASA, has worked the Olympics and Pan Am games) that would tell you this is the BU call and the PU should just note and help if asked.

Let the debate begin :D

This may vary by region. I have a partner I work with a lot who is almost always in synch with me. He calls it synchronized obstruction - our arms go up simultaneously 90% of the time. (Many of the rest are due to multiple runners and separate responsibilities). No one I work with in this league would expect PU to not call an OBS that BU passed on.

In the OP - where you have contact, I don't care where I'm working, I'm signalling that one, even if it pisses off partner.

Please don't call it Synchronized Umpiring with music and all...
We don't go for that around here.:D

Only if there was obstruction AND the umpire felt the runner would have reached third had the obstruction not occurred.

So, no. I'd have rung this runner up and had a chat with the coach about letting the umpires make the calls.

Mike...not quite sure that I'm understanding what you're saying here. The way I'm reading it, the BU chooses to pass on (as opposed to not having seen) an OBS, but if the PU sees it differently he can call OBS?

Yeah, I'd like to know what means "passed on"?:(

"Synchronized Umpires", "Passed on"

You are on FIRE, man!!!:):D:cool:

How would an umpire, on the field during live action, have any idea whether the BU "chose to pass on" or simply "did not see" the obstruction.

You see it you call it. I grant that as PU and 60-90 feet away, the OBS needs to be a little more obvious to be called - but if you see OBS - whether PU or BU, you call it.

Like I said, I suppose this may be regional ... I would never take umbrage at a partner PU that called an OBS on the bases. OBS just takes an instant, and it is usually away from the play - there are a huge number of reasons a BU could miss an OBS without doing anything wrong.

I really just mean didn't call. Probably a bad choice of words on my part, as it implies he SAW it and didn't call it --- which shouldn't happen.

Clears up my question (along with your other reply) as to what you were saying.
'Passed on" (a phrase used often by basketball refs when discussing plays) was a bad choice of words on my part.
No disagreement that a BU can miss an OBS without having done anything wrong.
What piqued my curiosity when I read your post had more to do with something that happened to me earlier this season.
Two man. I'm BU 2 outs R1 on 1st.
Ground ball to F4, in quick order I have R1 jumping over the ball as F4 is ranging to her right to try to backhand it, the ball is just by F4's out stretched glove hand as R1 comes down on her as she completes her jump over the grounder, they get tangled up. I'm processing all this (do I have INT? or do I have nothing?) when PU, (who is inside the diamond between the circle and the 1st baseline about even with the pitchers plate) calls R1 out for INT.
Now maybe I was too slow in determining what I had on the play, too slow in giving a safe signal if I had nothing, or a dead ball signal for iNT, but he decided he saw something and I didn't and he was going to make call.
Yes any ump can call INT or OBS, I just felt that the call was mine. This was not a case my not being in position to see what was happening, I was looking right at it and the PU just "jumped the call".

reported

Here is where I have an issue. . .There is an OBS, I am protecting them between the bases. . she RETREATS back to 2nd. . .TO ME that means she is ON second. . so now I OBS is off! When she leaves the base upon the coaches urging. . .she is fair game. . .if there is a play on her and she is out, she's OUT

Speaking ASA

No, you cannot make that call unless there was a subsequent play on another runner.

two (today) reported

Which means the runner can NOT be out between 2nd and 3rd, until the next pitch. Hence, the coach had nothing to lose having the runner try to advance.

I will never understand why otherwise good umpires insist on inventing rules. The ASA ruleset works very well on it's own. If you call that in your local league, your girls are at a disadvantage when they move on, in that they will believe your invented rule is correct and fail to attempt to take advantage when they could. (Call that in tourney, and you might as well not come back).

As stated in other ways by others, that simply isn't the rule, in ASA, NFHS, NCAA, or anywhere that I am aware of. Protection between the two bases remains until one of the following: 1) ALL PLAY is ended, meaning ball back in pitcher possession in the circle and all runners stopped on a base, or 2) obstructed runner is apparently put out, resulting in dead ball and protected base is awarded, 3) obstructed runner violates another of the specified running rules, or 4) after returning to the prior base, a play is made on ANOTHER runner, and THEN obstructed runner attempts to advance again, all during the same live play sequence.

Your version just isn't what the rules provide. Not a unique thought, just not correct.

It's not a particularly tough rule...I always wonder why people twist it, bend it, or try to make it harder than it is.

SPAM reported

To be very clear, for #4 in the mentioned play the runner could be put out after returning to the prior base because that's the base she would have reached without the obstruction. If she would have gotten third, she'd still be protected even after returning to second and a subsequent play to that.

reported

who's responsibility is the runner at second advancing to third?
 

The base ump is making the call on the batter runner. Yes the base ump would have a call on a throwback to second on R1. However, the plate ump would have R1 going into third. Ifthe Plate ump had called obstruction andbelieved the runner would have reached third had there been no obstruction then I have no problem with the plate ump making this call... that probably wasn't the case but I wasn't there and could have been the case and the fan/coach writing the question might not have seen the plate umps call.

reported that one too