Obstruction

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I

IE - obstructed rounding 2nd, but never going to make 3rd - award is 2nd, protection is between 2nd and 3rd. Then there's an intervening play and she heads to 3rd - the "between 2nd and 3rd" part of her protection goes away.

Just one thing to add to this, that if OBS between 2nd & 3rd and the award would be 2nd, for the subsequent play exception to take effect, that runner would have to return to 2nd safely and then try to advance to 3rd.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

I guess my point is, she'd have been safe without the OBS, and are the intervening plays technicalities per the rulebook that remove her protection?

Or just re-read the response, post #3 in this thread.

[jmkupka]

Not to add more elements to it, but as she had the head start, 3B coach sent her as soon as he saw the toss to F2. My take is he sent her based on the play at 1st & not on the OBS.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Not to add more elements to it, but as she had the head start, 3B coach sent her as soon as he saw the toss to F2. My take is he sent her based on the play at 1st & not on the OBS.

You're really looking at this in a strange manner.

Erase all the other noise from the play. Ignore trying to read the coach's mind. It's really this simple, and there's only one thing you should be worried about.

At the moment of obstruction, where did you, the umpire, think she would get to had there not been obstruction.

Ball in the infield - runner approaching 3rd. I think it's clear the answer is 3rd.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

Based on the wording of the OP, I would be awarding home? Why? If she was out on a bang bang play, she likely would have scored had she not be obstructed prior to 3b.

If she is thrown out by 10 feet, she's out as she already passed the base she would be protected to in my judgment.

10 feet huh? Do you know just how slightly a runner needs to be impeded to lose 10 feet? It's less than a second. Umpires need to start looking at obstruction more realistically when it comes to the "she was thrown out by X feet argument."

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

10 feet huh? Do you know just how slightly a runner needs to be impeded to lose 10 feet? It's less than a second. Umpires need to start looking at obstruction more realistically when it comes to the "she was thrown out by X feet argument."

Umpires need to STOP ENTIRELY using the "she was thrown out by X feet argument.

An umpire making a decision using that logic, or even making that statement after the fact, is waiting far too long to decide what the proper award should be.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Umpires need to STOP ENTIRELY using the "she was thrown out by X feet argument.

An umpire making a decision using that logic, or even making that statement after the fact, is waiting far too long to decide what the proper award should be.

I'm sorry, but I just don't have the clairvoyance to determine what the runner might have achieved minus the obstruction without letting everything play out.

Where does it say in the rules and interpretations that we must decide immediately what the proper award should be, and not deviate from that decision, no matter what happens next?

[tcannizzo]

We just had this discussion in "That's Interference"
http://forum.officiating.com/933817-post43.html

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I'm sorry, but I just don't have the clairvoyance to determine what the runner might have achieved minus the obstruction without letting everything play out.

Then you are probably in the wrong job since a good portion of an umpire's responsibilities involves making decisions based upon conjecture

Where does it say in the rules and interpretations that we must decide immediately what the proper award should be, and not deviate from that decision, no matter what happens next?

Where does it say you shouldn't? If you had attended a national clinic or school, or even just the CAR clinic, or at least when it was a decent rules clinic, you probably would have heard that direction.

And it is nothing new. Same direction I received a quarter of a century ago long before I became a UIC and clinician.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

R1 on 2B, R2 on 1B, no outs. R1 off on the pitch, hard grounder to F4, who tags R2 and throws to F3 to retire B3. F3 fires home.
R1 is obstructed by F5 just shy of 3B and is put out on a bang-bang play at home.
OC wants obstruction, DC points out there was not one, but two intervening plays after the OBS.
Triple play?

I guess this is a HTBT situation. Too many elements are missing from the discussion to say if this should be an award at home, an out, or something else. We don't know the how the playing action unfolded to determine if the runner should be protected home.

Thankfully softball games are played on the field and not online.

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

I guess this is a HTBT situation.

Thankfully softball games are played on the field and not online.

Well really every play is more or less HTBT. We all make "calls" on this forum based on a picture built up in our minds based on words on screen. The picture the reader has may not match the picture in the mind of the person who wrote those words. Something we should all keep in mind while we have our online debates and discussions!

Having said that the big point on this thread is the time to make your decision on where to protect a runner who has been obstructed is at the time of the obstruction based on situation at the time of the obstruction. Don't wait till end of all play and then decide on award.

The fact that a runner is put out on a close play when she was obstructed someplace else on the bases is not necessarily a reason to award that base.