OBS effect
 

R1 on 2nd. B2/R2 obstructed between 1st & 2nd, then tagged out at 2nd.
Dead ball, award R2 1st or 2nd as judged if non-OBS.

Tag occurred with R1 between 3rd & home.
ASA says award bases to all runners, NFHS says affected runners.
Could R1 be awarded home
if ITUJ, R1 would have been reached w/o the dead ball at 2nd?
ASA answer:
NFHS answer:
Does the ASA rule really mean only "affected", i.e. trailing runners? If so, citation please.

Another variation will follow later.

Either ruleset. She was affected because she was between bases when the ball was called dead. Give her the base she would have reached.

That's what I'm thinking. If you judge that the lead runner would have scored, then she was "affected" in that her advance was stopped when the ball become dead due to a rule violation by the defense.

If you judge that she wouldn't have scored, then put her back on third. I would tend to give every benefit of the doubt to the runner here.

Depends on which base you protect her to. PG 65 Penalty: (3b), a. says "If the obstructed runner is put out prior to reaching the base that would have been reached had there been no obstruction, a dead ball is called..." If you don't think she would have reached 2B, then I feel it's a delayed call until all playing action is completed. You would then put runner back at 1B. If you judge 2B to be the correct placement of the runner, then you would be correct.

The standard obstruction mechanic is anytime an obstructed is put out prior to reaching the base they would have reached, or between the two bases where they were obstructed then you call a dead ball and award the obstructed runner and all other runners affected by the obstruction the base(s) they would have reached had there been no obstruction. So reguardless of 1B or 2B award in your case you kill it when the runner is put out, and award the base(s) to the runners in your judgement they would have reached.

So in the original question I agree you have to judge where R1 would have been if you wouldn't have had to call a dead ball due to the obstruction and then you award them that base, in both codes.

I disagree. I don't believe the runner was affected by the OBS. The runner was affected by the OBS runner being retired. Being OBS is not always the cause of that runner being put out.

That's the point of my OP question "Does the ASA rule really mean only "affected", i.e. trailing runners? "

What stopped the runner's advance? The ball becoming dead.

Why did the ball become dead? Because an obstructed runner was tagged out.

Is the ball dead when a non-obstructed runner is tagged out? No.

Were it not for the obstruction, the lead runner would have been able to freely advance to home. That is why I think the lead runner was affected by the obstruction.

By this logic, is it saying that when the ball becomes dead, you return the runner to the last base touched as with most dead ball situations?

If so, does this not work to the disadvantage of the offense by not allowing a runner to advance? To me this goes against my feeling on obstruction that any benefit of the doubt should go to the offense.

And you don't know that. For as much as you know, if the ball wasn't dead, the defense could have retired the lead runner. But you don't know because the ball is dead.

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem scoring the runner if they were more than halfway home. That was always the rule of thumb interpretation in the past, but not just at home, but every base.

I just have a problem stretching rules because once you start, it can easily get out of control.

I'm confused. You're saying you don't think the rules permit us to award the runner the base she was nearer to when obstruction kills the play, but you want us to do it anyway?

I'm saying that was a long-time interpretation. I am also saying that stretching the present rule is not a good idea and maybe someone should propose a rule change to make it clearer so you don't have umpires making up their own "interpretations" to justify whatever it is they want to do

We don't have to make up interpretations. We are told to place the runners (all of them) at the bases we feel they would have achieved absent the obstruction. Seems kind of simple to me.

This is where my finely-tuned sense of umpire judgment comes into play. :)

Where are you told to do that? Your answer will most likely be the rule being discussed and my argument is that you can TWP that rule in too many directions. IMO, a runner between 3rd and home is not affected by an OBS between 1st & 2nd.

Now, can anyone point out where is states that on a dead ball, all runners must return to the last bases that did not involve a violation by the offense?