Don't like the call

[greymule]

Maybe ASA will back up this preposterous ruling, but I don't read it that way at all. Nothing in the case book supports this instructor's claim. And while the rule book does give a general statement—"should an act of interference occur following any obstruction, enforcement of the interference penalty would have precedence"—I believe they're talking about a runner who interferes after being obstructed. The book examples deal with a runner being obstructed and then that same runner committing interference:

"An obstructed runner may not be called out between the two bases where obstructed unless properly appealed for missing a base, for leaving a base before a fly ball was first touched, for an act of interference, or for passing another runner." (I edited to correct the book's horrendous construction.) Also POE #34: "An obstructed runner could be called out between the two bases the runner was obstructed if they were properly appealed for missing a base or leaving a base before a fly ball was first touched. If the runner committed an act of interference after the obstruction, this too would overrule the obstruction." Another grammatical and syntactical abomination, but the main point is that a runner who is obstructed doesn't have license to interfere.

Note this strange ruling, too, from POE #34: "A runner leaving second base too soon on a fly ball is returning after the ball is caught and is obstructed between 2B and 3B. If the runner would not have made it back to 2B prior to the throw arriving, he would remain out. So if he would have been out, there's no obstruction? Where did that idea come from? How about the runner on 2B who trips over F6 five steps off the bag and then F5 tags 3B for a force out? The runner would have been out so we ignore the obstruction? Or does we ignore it only if he's running in reverse?

Yes, the book gives the general statement, but many such statements in the ASA book cannot be taken literally.

To me, catcher's obstruction would be the call in this case. Now if, after the batter swung and hit F2's glove, he hit a roller down the 1B line and then ran over F3 as he was fielding it, maybe that's a different story.