Overrunning 1B - Obstruction

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by CecilOne
It's not so much a question of "movement and intent" not being in the rule as it is what factors we use to judge where the runner would have been without the obstruction.
I agree it's pretty simple, but we tend to get overly analytical about certain rules. Without criticizing or insulting anyone on this forum, do I dare say those rules are the ones that umpires in general are inconsistent about or which certain umpires feel guilty about or especially those that have related myths. The inconsistency I refer to is from one umpire to another, not between the calls of an individual umpire.

I tend to agree. Maybe it's because people just believe it is so simple, it must be a trick, so they try to read "meaning" and "intent" into the rule. They try to draw comparisons with other rules. The try to reconcile the obstruction with something they deem fair to the other team. Then you have the dreaded Principle of Advantage/Disadvantage coming into play.

Defenders not prone to the obstruction rule: Player with the ball, about to receive a thrown ball or a player fielding a batted ball.

The act: With no intention required, any other defender causes any active R/BR to stop, break stride, hesitate or adjust their path whether contact is made or not.

React: Throw out the arm.

Conclusion: When all play is obviously complete or the obstructed runner is put out, kill the play, award obstructed runner and any other runners affected the base they would have reached safely had the obstruction not occur.

Very simple. Now , catcher's obstruction is a bit more complicated and a discussion for another time.