Revisiting That Cardinals-Red Sox WS Game That Ended on the Obstruction Call

[Radie 88]

This one is probably pretty infamous around discussions between umpires, so most of you probably know it by heart, but here's the video anyway: 

My father was an umpire, so I've always had a good handle on the rules and basic umpiring stuff, but it wasn't until I started calling games myself that I've begun to take notice of the really finer points: mechanics, timing and advanced positioning.. Those kinds of things. 

I've been watching a lot of famous plays to see how these things were handled by the respective umpires. This one had me a bit confused.

But not for anything to do with what occurred at 3rd base... 

My understanding (and I could be wrong, causing myself the confusion) is that on an obstruction call, the umpire making the call indicates that obstruction happened but that as a play moves to another base and another umpire, that 2nd umpire has to first rule on what he saw at his base, then factor in the results of the obstruction.

So looking at this play again, shouldn't the PU have called the runner out on the tag and THEN awarded the run on the obstruction call? Unless I'm missing something, he seems to have noticed the obstruction call by the 3U and called the play safe based on that. 

Whats the proper way to call this? If he did this correctly, I'm pretty shocked as I can imagine any number of things can go south quickly. 

Also, I know that the results of an obstruction call is at the umpires discretion on what would have happened had the obstruction not occurred, but on this play, which umpire decides that?

[Rich Ives]

A soon as a tag is made on the obstructed runner you call time and make awards (if any)

 

MLBUM:  However, if such a play on a previously obstructed runner results in that
runner actually being tagged out before reaching the base to which he would have been awarded
because of the obstruction, the umpire shall in that case call "Time" at the moment the runner is
tagged out. The umpire shall then impose such penalties that will nullify the obstruction

[noumpere]

8 hours ago, Radie said:

My understanding (and I could be wrong, causing myself the confusion) is that on an obstruction call, the umpire making the call indicates that obstruction happened but that as a play moves to another base and another umpire, that 2nd umpire has to first rule on what he saw at his base, then factor in the results of the obstruction.

So looking at this play again, shouldn't the PU have called the runner out on the tag and THEN awarded the run on the obstruction call? Unless I'm missing something, he seems to have noticed the obstruction call by the 3U and called the play safe based on that. 

 

Your understanding  / assumption in the first paragraph seems based on umpires working in isolation with (almost) no knowledge of what the other umpire might have called and no in-play verbal or non-verbal communication.

 

As you point out in the second paragraph, that's not true.  And a quick glance at U3 can communicate what the "award" will be.  No need to call out and then appear to reverse (or be "overruled") the call.

[jms1425]

Not to mention that Demuth (PU) saw and called the obstruction as well (at the 1:37 mark and at the 1:54 you can see him do it), so he made his call of safe at the plate based on his observation of obstruction at 3rd base.

I'll agree with the OP in that Demuth signaled "safe" before signaling "time", but that's a pretty trivial point in the whole thing. Bottom of the 9th in the World Series and I'm ending a game on an obstruction?!?! Yeah - I'd have probably gotten the order of my signals wrong, too.

And FWIW - this moment more than probably any other made me proud to be an umpire. Joyce and Demuth were both faced with a call that an umpire - even one calling 162 games a year - might see once or twice a year. And it happened in the bottom of the 9th in the World Series, and they were ALL OVER IT.

Super-mega-props to those guys.

[jms1425]

Fantastic article on the play:

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/10647034/mlb-2013-world-series-obstruction-call

[MT73]

I watched that game live on TV I was screaming, "Obstruction! Obstruction"!

Yes, as a Yankee fan I always root against the Sox.

Good call by Joyce.

Not nit picking, but the PU should have called time before awarding home on the obs.

[beerguy55]

22 minutes ago, MT73 said:

Not nit picking, but the PU should have called time before awarding home on the obs.

I don't mean to be rude, but....

I'm not racist, but...

I'm not nitpicking, but...

Yes, you are exactly nitpicking.

[catsbackr]

23 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

I don't mean to be rude, but....

I'm not racist, but...

I'm not nitpicking, but...

Yes, you are exactly nitpicking.

What?

[beerguy55]

27 minutes ago, catsbackr said:

What?

Meaning that, typically speaking, when you hear someone say "I'm not xxxx, but" the very next thing they say is exactly what they claim they're not.