Precedence & Priority

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Steve M

I don't see the ambiguity.

Bear in mind, this is an "academic" discussion, not me questioning the rule.

The ambiguity is that the rule say OBS is called if the defender is blocking a base, not that the fielder blocking the base is OBS.
The "literal wording" leaves a gap between "obstruction is called" and being obstruction because it does not include hindrance or literally saying the blocking is OBS.
The wording could imply a connotation that the OBS is called for the sake of the penalty (where it says "obstruction is called") and not because it is OBS.

Yes, I know, semantics and all that, but an example for discussion to allow better understanding of other similar rule wording.

Also, it says base line not base path.