Obstruction in Rays-Dbacks game

[woodiemiller]

​I disagree with the bolded part. He should have been protected for the few steps he was actually obstructed.

Looking at the video, I'd be inclined to give him generous obstruction protection--up to four or maybe even five full strides--but that hinges on him continuing on to third. He fell, but when he got back up made no attempt to continue on, meaning he's now lost my protection of those few strides.

​That is simply not the PRO rule. He was on his way to 3b when he was obstructed. You cannot protect him for "x" amount of steps. Thats just not correct.

[MikeSafari]

@Welpe My reading of the rule suggests that you can only award bases on obstruction when a play is not being made on the obstructed runner, which is what we see here:

7.06(b) If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall then call “Time” and impose such penalties, if any, as in his judgment will nullify the act of obstruction.

Comment: Under 7.06(b) when the ball is not dead on obstruction and an obstructed runner advances beyond the base which, in the umpire’s judgment, he would have been
awarded because of being obstructed, he does so at his own peril and may be tagged out. This is a judgment call.

I guess the umpire crew decided that he was tagged out before the base he would have been awarded, so he shouldn't be tagged out for it.

Ultimately it's a confusing play, but reading the rule makes me think they probably got it right.

That is simply not the PRO rule. He was on his way to 3b when he was obstructed. You cannot protect him for "x" amount of steps. Thats just not correct.

​Fair enough, I can't argue with that. The last time I trained specifically on obstruction protocol was probably about 10 years ago, so I'm just going off memory.

[ricka56]

In the OP video you don't see where the ball is, in relation to the obstruction. The umpires could have decided that if the runner hadn't been obstructed (knocked down) he probably wouldn't have belatedly tried for 3B so they protected him back to 2B (where he would have been absent the obstruction). Unconventional, but I could see the logic in it.

[basejester]

In the OP video you don't see where the ball is, in relation to the obstruction. The umpires could have decided that if the runner hadn't been obstructed (knocked down) he probably wouldn't have belatedly tried for 3B so they protected him back to 2B (where he would have been absent the obstruction). Unconventional, but I could see the logic in it.

If he wouldn't even have tried for third absent the obstruction, then he's attempted to advance past the award.  He's just wandering around like a dumbass because he doesn't understand the rule and gets tagged out.  Out.  The umpires in the huddle must have just compromised between some who wanted the out and others who wanted to award third base, so they just split the difference.

 

[Richvee]

Here's my take. Myers was confused before getting to 2nd. By the time he rounded 2nd, the throw was already on it's way in from F9 into F4. That's about when the OBS happened. 

MLBUM:

Rule 7.06 The obstruction mechanic- Note(3) If a runner is obstructed when no play is being made on  him, the umpire making the call should have the benefit of input of his partners in determining what bases, if any, shall be awarded to the obstructed runner. In other words "The crew may confer in order to determine what reasonably might have happened had the obstruction not occurred"

I believe there are 2 outcomes that could be considered "reasonable" had there been no obstruction on this play.

1.   After being so confused running into 2nd, It's reasonable to think Myers  would have just rounded 2nd and returned seeing F9 had already returned the ball to the infield. 

2. It's also reasonable to think Myers, had he not been obstructed would have been out by a good distance if he continued to 3rd. After all, F4 has the ball not long after Myers passes 2nd.  

 

Both are reasonable outcomes, and I think the crew picked the 1st option here. 

[ricka56]

If he wouldn't even have tried for third absent the obstruction, then he's attempted to advance past the award.  He's just wandering around like a dumbass because he doesn't understand the rule and gets tagged out.  Out. 

​I think that after R2 got up, returning back to 2B wasn't an option (F4 had the ball near 2B). I don't think it'd be reasonable to expect R2 to move towards a sure tag at 2B and hope that the umpire was going to protect him back to that base.

[johnnyg08]

I don't think the runner had any idea what he was doing.  He got deked so bad prior to that play the obstruction was the best thing that happened to him on that play.

[Welpe]

Rich-

I think that's a reasonable analysis. Thanks for posting the MLBUM interp. These are the types of plays that make this game interesting.

[basejester]

Suppose the batter-runner has his shoe untied.  He hits the ball to the outfield in a gap.  The first baseman obstructs the BR as he rounds first base (Type B obstruction).  We judge that he lost 2 steps. Half-way between second and third base the batter-runner trips on his shoe lace, falls down, injures himself, and cannot stand up.  He is tagged by the defense.  That's an out, right?  Absent the obstruction, he would still be out, so he's just out.

OK, now suppose the same play, but the BR just stops half-way between first and second bases.  Do you award him third base because people usually don't trip on shoe laces?  What's his motivation to keep playing if we're going to assume all goes well for him?

 

 

[ricka56]

Suppose the batter-runner has his shoe untied.  He hits the ball to the outfield in a gap.  The first baseman obstructs the BR as he rounds first base (Type B obstruction).  We judge that he lost 2 steps. Half-way between second and third base the batter-runner trips on his shoe lace, falls down, injures himself, and cannot stand up.  He is tagged by the defense.  That's an out, right?  Absent the obstruction, he would still be out, so he's just out.

OK, now suppose the same play, but the BR just stops half-way between first and second bases.  Do you award him third base because people usually don't trip on shoe laces?  What's his motivation to keep playing if we're going to assume all goes well for him?

@‌​basejester ... surely you jest 

[tiger49]

So was the PU's sweat-stained hat like that BEFORE he started the game or did that occur DURING?   I wrestle with this problem all season long.  Can't stand the white salt-wave on my hats. 

Too long of a conference between umpires (but ultimately, I think they got it right) and WAY WAY WAY too long talking with the coach after the decision. 

​http://www.dryshine.ca/se_en.html works for hats as well.