No obstruction?

[Gfoley4]

http://mediadownloads.mlb.com/mlbam/mp4/2016/05/01/646353683/1462131621609/asset_1800K.mp4 Thoughts?

[krwill96]

From the looks of it, looks like the umpire called the runner went into the fielder after he left his base path which he ruled as no obstruction. Not sure if I would call that in real time but that's one of the reasons they make what they do. Either way it's a tough call. 

[KenBAZ]

Wow, looked like an easy obstruction call to me. Not sure what I missed.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[maven]

Initially, I disagreed with the call.

After watching a couple times, it appears that the runner backs up into the path of the fielder peeling off. That's not a bona fide attempt to run the bases. A runner hindering himself shouldn't draw an OBS call.

It's pretty subtle. I could see OBS being supportable on the same action at any level. The fielder who made contact with R1 executed poorly: he needed to stop sooner before throwing.

[udbrky]

On the second look, he started backpedaling into RF. Pretty interesting call though, either way.

[Richvee]

Just now, KenBAZ said:

Wow, looked like an easy obstruction call to me. Not sure what I missed.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Agree. Unless I am missing something with my understanding of the rule, this is 100% OBS all day. If I'm wrong someone please enlighten me.

[Richvee]

6 minutes ago, krwill96 said:

From the looks of it, looks like the umpire called the runner went into the fielder after he left his base path which he ruled as no obstruction. Not sure if I would call that in real time but that's one of the reasons they make what they do. Either way it's a tough call. 

?? AlI I have is a change of direction, and BANG, there's F3.

[udbrky]

12s he drifts to RF and backpedals.

[noumpere]

6 minutes ago, udbrky said:

12s he drifts to RF and backpedals.

It's a 50-50 call.  When R1 reverses -- is F3 in his way?  Is that what casues R1 to go toward RF?  And then F3(or whoever it was) also moves that way resulting in the contact?  That's OBS.

Or, was F3 already moving out of the way when R1 reversed, R1 sees thas and moves toward RF resulting in the contact?  That's nothing.

The umpire saw the latter.

[udbrky]

Watching it several times, it's easy to see, but I think IRT, I'm calling OBS and don't see anyone arguing.

[Richvee]

Sorry. All I see is a runner turn towards first and there's a 6-2, 240 pound body right in front of him, and jogging right into him.

EDIT...My bad..that Ryan Webb in his way...6-6-245.

[maven]

I hope that everyone here understands what a "50-50 call" is, and the pointlessness of arguing about one.

[udbrky]

Well

Quote

but I think IRT, I'm calling OBS and don't see anyone arguing.

was pretty much me admitting this could go either way and I don't see anyone arguing much.

 

[Kevin_K]

Similar to this play from last year's CWS:

 

[udbrky]

Ugh "He was on the grass" They should get an umpire to fact check the crew. So many bad broadcasters.

[Welpe]

I think that was an excellent no call.

[maven]

1 hour ago, Welpe said:

I think that was an excellent no call.

Why?

I mean, I agree that it's a no call, and I agree that it's supportable. But if the call were truly excellent, it should be the only correct call, or at least clearly preferable to the alternative. I don't think we can say that about any 50-50 call.

[grayhawk]

I would have called obstruction every time on this.  We've all seen FAR less called obstruction during run downs in MLB games.

[lawump]

Without having it in front of me, I believe the language of the umpire's manual states that it is not obstruction if the runner intentionally alters his course to make contact with a fielder who is not protected.

To me, that is the question in the play in the OP: did the runner intentionally alter his course in an attempt to secure an obstruction call? 

In watching this play on the link found at closecallsports.com (which has a slow motion replay, unlike the link in the OP), it appears to me that when the runner actually "threw on the brakes" to start heading back to first (just prior to the collision) that he lost his footing and actually stumbled backwards before regaining his footing to start back toward first base.  If so, then this would be obstruction (as stumbling is not an intentional act to try and draw an obstruction call).  However, at real world speed I may have made the same call as U2.

[dookiexman]

My problem with the call is the fielder didn't alter his path after his throw until the final step and that was right into the runner. This is why I would call OBS on this play. He seems to stutter step until the runner is stopped, then he takes a half step out toward RF which is where the runner was.