noumpere

I think he was safe when the tag was initially applied but readjusted his foot and lifted it from the white. I do NOT have that as being pushed off the base.

Depends on what had happened prior to this, etc, and the umpire's assessment of the action. Could range from just a discussion, to an ejection, to later action taken by the conference.

1) I see the hesitation as removing the "tangle-untangle" protection for the runner. 2) BR mis-read the ball in your hypothetical play and could be called for INT.

I always taught it like this: A runner is out when hit by a batted ball. Period. Except, that's not fair to the runner when the ball goes through or *immediately past* a fielder who is right in front of the runner. The runner thinks the fielder is going to glove the ball, and the runner has no time to react when the fielder doesn't. So, we have an exception to the rule. Except, that's not fair to the defense when another fielder could make a play on the ball. Heck , the first fielder might let it go on purpose because the second fielder is moving in the direction of an eventual throw. So, we have an exception to the exception. And, now we have the whole rule.

"Tag the base to get an out" and "force play" are not synonymous.

I think he (Manfred) did.

Possibly. When a call is reversed, the umpires do their best to place runners where they would have been. So, if R2 was returning and only didn't return because the ball was dropped, place him back at second or third using your judgment. If R2 tried to return, but "left early" even before the ball was touched, call the out.

It's not really covered, but I'd do something like that. I probably wouldn't point back at the obstruction, though -- point at the runner in lieu of making a safe (or out) signal.

BOTH BU and PU can (BU must; a good PU should) glance at first to see if R1 is on the base (or returning to it) as the ball is coming down. But, at the exact moment of the ball hitting the glove, no one can be looking at first. Both BU and PU can then look back at first after the catch to see if R1 is still in the vicinity of the base (heck, if it's a clean catch, PU can often see R1's back foot still in the air).

I think you need to understand what a play is: No Play was being attempted WHEN the runner was obstructed. Any play after the OBS does not matter (for this rule).

Those are the rules, but the minimum applies ONLY when the runner is obstructed while a play is being made (or BR before first). In the video, the OBS happened when no play was being made, so there's no minimum. If there had been no OBS, the runner likely would have remained at first. When he then proceeded to second, he did so at his own risk and is out.

I had once in a 40+ year career.

The double play here is catching the fly and making an appeal. If there was an R1, then F3 is somewhere near the base to start the play. If F3 caught the ball and there wasn't any interference, who was covering first ? (hint: probably no one). So, no double play is obvious. You'll get the DP when R1 (or any R) is far from the base and interferes with someone other than the filed er normally assigned to that base, so, in your example, R1 interferes with F4.

Arbiter, Blue Zebra, RefQuest, RefTown. Yes, keeping them all sync'd is a pain, especially those that have multiple groups within them.

I *think* in FED the DP only need be "obvious" (or some such word), not "willful and deliberate"