Obstruction or Out?

[Pops]

HS Rules; R2 and 1 out.

Batter hits a line drive to right-center field and R2 takes off for third thinking it will fall in for a hit. F5 gets in the way of R2 and the PU immediately sticks the left fist out to call the delayed interference. However, F8 dives and catches the ball and throws to second for the apparent DP. BU sees the catch and the throw to second and signals out for the DP.

Does the PU call time and discuss with the BU or does he keep his mouth shut and ignore the INT knowing his partners call?

[scrounge]

Hmm, interesting. Seems like without the obstruction, R2 would have been even further away and even more unlikely to get back and avoid getting doubled up. Without tagging up, R2 isn't a valid runner, and barring malicious/intentional contact, I'm not sure the foul here. Now if F8 in any way interfered with R2 getting back after the catch or after realizing a catch was possible, then I can see protecting R2 back to 2nd. But simply obstructing the advance to 3rd? Sounds like a double play on initial look.

[kylejt]

Does the PU call time and discuss with the BU or does he keep his mouth shut and ignore the INT knowing his partners call?

The latter. He can help, if requested by his partner for more information.

[Rich Ives]

Without tagging up, R2 isn't a valid runner,

Sure he is. He has just acquired a tag-up oligation. And you can rule that the obstruction was why he couldn't get back to 2B too. He does have to go back to 2B to tag. If it's OBR you can keep him at 2B IF you decide hew would have made it back. In OBR you can say it had no effect and let the out stand.

I'm not sure you can un-call obstruction in FED. If you can't he has to tag on his was to his awarded 3B.

[Pops]

Without tagging up, R2 isn't a valid runner,

Sure he is. He has just acquired a tag-up oligation. And you can rule that the obstruction was why he couldn't get back to 2B too. He does have to go back to 2B to tag. If it's OBR you can keep him at 2B IF you decide hew would have made it back. In OBR you can say it had no effect and let the out stand.

I'm not sure you can un-call obstruction in FED. If you can't he has to tag on his was to his awarded 3B.

The situation as described in the OP refers to an obstruction call on the way to 3B. This was called before the catch was made. Wouldn't you call him out for not tagging up rather than award him 3B in any of the codes?

[Mike Prince]

Sounds like the umpires will discuss in this situation if the OBS is not honored because any OM worth anything is going to ask for help from your partner if R2 is called out on this.

In any case, once OBS was called you have to rule on it and award unless the runner goes past where you protect him to or makes it there on his own. Whether he would have gotten back or not should not be the issue under discussion here, the OBS at a minimum should prevent the runner from being called out, he was prevented from returning to 2B and under NFHS rules he should be awarded 3B. This should be the PU's call since BU had the catch and the touch responsibilities so the OBS is likely out of his view.

Only thing I can see upholding the R2 out is if the umpires get together and determine that R2 intentionally ran into F6 trying to draw an OBS call (good luck with that).

EDIT - realized this was HS rules so I edited my response accordingly.

Edited May 1, 2012 by Mike Prince

[carolinablue]

Was the runner still advancing during the OBS. or trying to return?

[UmpJM]

Under FED rules, the PU should absolutely call "TIME!" and award the obstructed runner 3B, nullifying his BU's call of out. This is NOT "overruling" his partner - they each rule independently on different aspects of the play.

Though awarded 3B, the runner is still obligated to retouch 2B (while the ball is dead) and he must do so before touching 3B. If he fails to retouch 2B, he is liable to an appeal of his failure to retouch and the BU has the responsibility to rule on the appeal.

Under OBR, I concur with Rich I. - it's "Type B" obstruction and the umpire would be proper in either letting the out stand or allowing the runner to remain at 2B, depending on his judgement of how the obstruction affected the result of the play.

The FED rule is materially different - the obstructed runner is ALWAYS awarded a minimum of one base beyond his position at the time he was obstructed. Doesn't matter if he was advancing or retreating, or if he clearly and obviously would have been out, even if he hadn't been obstructed.

JM

[carolinablue]

Thanks JM, I probably would have screwed that up if it happened in a HS game because I would have ruled on whether the OBS affected his ability to return to 2B or not.

[Thunderheads]

Under FED rules, the PU should absolutely call "TIME!" and award the obstructed runner 3B, nullifying his BU's call of out. This is NOT "overruling" his partner - they each rule independently on different aspects of the play.

Though awarded 3B, the runner is still obligated to retouch 2B (while the ball is dead) and he must do so before touching 3B. If he fails to retouch 2B, he is liable to an appeal of his failure to retouch and the BU has the responsibility to rule on the appeal.

Under OBR, I concur with Rich I. - it's "Type B" obstruction and the umpire would be proper in either letting the out stand or allowing the runner to remain at 2B, depending on his judgement of how the obstruction affected the result of the play.

The FED rule is materially different - the obstructed runner is ALWAYS awarded a minimum of one base beyond his position at the time he was obstructed. Doesn't matter if he was advancing or retreating, or if he clearly and obviously would have been out, even if he hadn't been obstructed.

JM

FED is dumb :shakehead:

[Pops]

In the OP, the runner was trying to advance to 3B thinking that the ball was dropping for a hit. That's where the OBS occurred (before the catch was made). He didn't make an attempt to get back to second, but the ball was thrown there to double him up. So my question still stands: Wouldn't you call him out for not tagging up rather than award him 3B on an OBS call in any of the codes? The OBS had nothing to do with reaching the next base because he would have had to go back to 2B tag up anyway. And what if the apparent OBS occurred after the catch or after the throw to 2B...would this change anything on this play? I'm just not getting why you'd enforce the OBS when it seems to be inconsequential. Can't you ignore the OBS in this case?

[Thunderheads]

In the OP, the runner was trying to advance to 3B thinking that the ball was dropping for a hit. That's where the OBS occurred (before the catch was made). He didn't make an attempt to get back to second, but the ball was thrown there to double him up. So my question still stands: Wouldn't you call him out for not tagging up rather than award him 3B on an OBS call in any of the codes? The OBS had nothing to do with reaching the next base because he would have had to go back to 2B tag up anyway. And what if the apparent OBS occurred after the catch or after the throw to 2B...would this change anything on this play? I'm just not getting why you'd enforce the OBS when it seems to be inconsequential. Can't you ignore the OBS in this case?

Pops,

JM is saying that in FED, OBS is always an award regardless, and regardless of his direction. BUT, ........I will wait for others to chime in

[Mike Prince]

Perhaps I am in the minority, but having a hard time seeing how you ignore the called OBS and have R2 out regardless of rule set. Those impact the award, but the runner is protected to somewhere on the OBS. If you award 3B, he has to touch 2B first, or he gets returned to 2B. Seems like we are penalizing the runner for being obstructed because he made a bonehead baserunning error prior to the OBS, but that doesn't seem to eliminate the fact that the OBS happened (and was called/signaled).

[ukce1861]

Perhaps I am in the minority, but having a hard time seeing how you ignore the called OBS and have R2 out regardless of rule set. Those impact the award, but the runner is protected to somewhere on the OBS. If you award 3B, he has to touch 2B first, or he gets returned to 2B. Seems like we are penalizing the runner for being obstructed because he made a bonehead baserunning error prior to the OBS, but that doesn't seem to eliminate the fact that the OBS happened (and was called/signaled).

If the runner advances beyond the base he would've reached absent the obstruction, he does so at his own risk. If there's no effort on the runner's part to return to 2nd base, I would consider him as advancing beyond the base he would've reached absent the obstruction. Now, if there's an effort to return, you would certainly have a case for placing him back on 2nd (or possibly awarding 3rd, but that seems unlikely).

For FED, I'm not sure you can unring the bell. Once you call OBS, the rules are clear that he's awarded a minimum of one base. I think you'd probably have to award the base...

[Pops]

Perhaps I am in the minority, but having a hard time seeing how you ignore the called OBS and have R2 out regardless of rule set. Those impact the award, but the runner is protected to somewhere on the OBS. If you award 3B, he has to touch 2B first, or he gets returned to 2B. Seems like we are penalizing the runner for being obstructed because he made a bonehead baserunning error prior to the OBS, but that doesn't seem to eliminate the fact that the OBS happened (and was called/signaled).

Yes, I see it as penalizing the runner for not tagging up since the OBS has no bearing on the play. When F5 gets in the way just enough that R2 has to sidestep him, I'd rather not penalize the defense for R2's bonehead running. I need more convincing that I'm wrong.

[Mike Prince]

Bear with my train of thought for a minute - so if we have a rundown in FED that is caused by a stupid baserunning play (yeah I know those never happen) and the runner is obviously going to be out but he gets obstructed, we call him out because he made a mistake and he would have been out anyway? Don't think so.

8-3-2 says that when obstruction happens when advancing or returning to a base, the award is the base he would have reached absent the obstruction in the umpire's judgement. The example above shows you have to pick one, you can't say he would have been out anyway. In FED OBS is punitive, plain and simple so once you call it you can't take it away unless the runner goes past the protection on his own.

Also think about how you would word the ruling in the EJ report - I can't see the OM staying in the game with the "he would have been out anyway" explanation.

[ukce1861]

Bear with my train of thought for a minute - so if we have a rundown in FED that is caused by a stupid baserunning play (yeah I know those never happen) and the runner is obviously going to be out but he gets obstructed, we call him out because he made a mistake and he would have been out anyway? Don't think so.

8-3-2 says that when obstruction happens when advancing or returning to a base, the award is the base he would have reached absent the obstruction in the umpire's judgement. The example above shows you have to pick one, you can't say he would have been out anyway. In FED OBS is punitive, plain and simple so once you call it you can't take it away unless the runner goes past the protection on his own.

Also think about how you would word the ruling in the EJ report - I can't see the OM staying in the game with the "he would have been out anyway" explanation.

I agree with that argument in FED. I don't think the same thing applies in other codes.

Now, your rundown example isn't a good one for non-FED codes, because OBS in a rundown is going to be Type A, so the result will be the same as FED, a punitive enforcement of OBS.

[Mike Prince]

Correct, that is why I made sure to emphasize FED in that post since the OP says this was HS rules so I assumed FED.

[Rich Ives]

.

8-3-2 says that when obstruction happens when advancing or returning to a base, the award is the base he would have reached absent the obstruction in the umpire's judgement.

You aren't reading far enough. It also says a minimum of one base.

Now after you award the one base he still has to go back and tag before going to 3B.

[Mike Prince]

.

8-3-2 says that when obstruction happens when advancing or returning to a base, the award is the base he would have reached absent the obstruction in the umpire's judgement.

You aren't reading far enough. It also says a minimum of one base.

Now after you award the one base he still has to go back and tag before going to 3B.

Yup, I agree 100% Rich. I said that in an earlier post so I didn't repeat it in this one.

[Welpe]

In softball we'd....nevermind, no need to further complicate this.

I agree with Rich, JM and others that say the runner is awarded 3B with a requirement to retouch 2B. He is allowed a chance to retouch after awarded 3B but if he opts not to then he is liable to be putout on appeal.

[mstaylor]

Welpe is exactly correct. He is awarded third but is subject to be an appeal for not retouching second. The problem with this whole play is there really wasn't obstruction. If the SS getting in the way was when the runner was advancing to third, there is no obstruction. If it happened when he was trying to return then award third but he still has to retouch second. Now, if the obstruction is on the advance, observe it but wait to see if it actually affects the play. If the throw goes behind him and he is showing no sign of going back, which is how I read the OP, then obviously there is no obstruction.

[poppyfor3]

Michael, help me out. Please explain your decision to call nothing as the play develops. I am definitely not baiting you. The what ifs later in this play is my concern. And I really am interested in getting better.

[mstaylor]

With FED you can't unring the bell so when you announce obstruction you have to make sure there actually is an obstruction. There are times with an OBR type B obstruction where the play makes the obstruction irrelevant. Usually that means that the runner reached the award base. However, in this case the runner was obstructed going to third, but he was then required to return to second. The possible obstruction had nothing to do with his inability to get back to second so there is no obstruction. Now if the SS had knocked him down or turned him so he was unaware the fielder caught the ball, then there is obstruction. In OBR, you can call obstruction and doing nothing could be the correct call. In FED, you don't have that option. You announce it and you have to award it. This means you have to be a little more careful about calling obstruction.

[poppyfor3]

Michael, thank you for the reply. Call me dense, but the OP says only the fielder got in the way and PU called the obstruction. THEN the catch was made. If the OBS call is not made immediately, do you not have a problem? I have been taught to see it, call it. Is it a possibility the runner thought the fielder was DELIBERATELY keeping him from 3rd and put his head down to reach 3rd on the "base hit"? I recognize that the OP doesn't fully describe the OBS and I get all you have said. What I am asking (poorly perhaps) is when you determine to announce that there has been OBS.