Preferred mechanic for obstruction

[Gfoley4]

What is the preferred mechanic for Type B obstruction in these situations? I've seen it both ways under MLB umpires.

 

 

...and both times MLB says that it's "interference"

[Stk004]

I couldn't watch the second video but I believe mechanics were spot on in the first clip. U3 pointed and verbalized "That's Obstruction!" Then, once a play was made on the obstructed runner that "retired him" (horrible verbage but I can't think of anything better), PU called "Time" and awarded R2 home. 

[Gfoley4]

9 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

I couldn't watch the second video but I believe mechanics were spot on in the first clip. U3 pointed and verbalized "That's Obstruction!" Then, once a play was made on the obstructed runner that "retired him" (horrible verbage but I can't think of anything better), PU called "Time" and awarded R2 home. 

The second clip is the pretty much the same, but the PU bangs the out then immediately points at where the obstruction was and then points at home plate to score the run

[Thunderheads]

6 hours ago, Gfoley4 said:

The second clip is the pretty much the same, but the PU bangs the out then immediately points at where the obstruction was and then points at home plate to score the run

proper would be (I think) .......TIME ......... we have obstruction, runner is safe, then signal.  I don't believe they say to call the out, then reverse it

[maven]

First off, we should not rely on MLB umpires as guides for our mechanics. Those guys are allowed to do pretty much whatever they want: some of them keep current, some use mechanics that they learned in school 30 years ago. If you want to watch pro umpires for the mechanics, go to your local MiLB park and watch them instead.

The second video is from 2009, so that might explain some differences, and raises a second point: we have MLB video from the last 50 years, and umpiring had evolved quite a bit in that time.

When an obstructed runner (type 2) is subsequently put out, call time, announce the OBS, and make the award. There's no point calling such a runner out, only then to signal safe.

IIRC, there's a PBUC case play for this mechanic.

[ALStripes17]

What is the preferred mechanic for Type B obstruction in these situations? I've seen it both ways under MLB umpires.

[/url]  

 

...and both times MLB says that it's "interference"

Umpires don't run the websites so verbiage is lost on the web geeks. Dont listen to announcers because they haven't cracked a rule book.

As a side note, It looked like the runner was safe in the Braves video anyway. That ball pops around Pierzynski's glove on the tag haha.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Richvee]

Watching the first clip got me thinking.

In this clip, the play was close, so it's pretty clear, had there been no obstruction by F6, R2 would have scored. 

For the sake of discussion, let's say the obstruction happens exactly as in the first clip. (Obstruction by F6 causing R2 to deviate around F6.). Now let's say R2 is thrown out at the plate by a good 15-20 feet. Who would have the call as to weather or not to award R2 home, or just 3rd? I'm assuming U3, the umpire who called the OBS. So, shouldn't PU make a call, then call time, and check to see if U3 is awarding home?  Or, should PU just call time, then take a look at the calling umpire, who, perhaps should be pointing to the base he's awarding, then PU can point the run counts, or call him out?

 

[Replacematt]

6 minutes ago, Richvee said:

Watching the first clip got me thinking.

In this clip, the play was close, so it's pretty clear, had there been no obstruction by F6, R2 would have scored. 

For the sake of discussion, let's say the obstruction happens exactly as in the first clip. (Obstruction by F6 causing R2 to deviate around F6.). Now let's say R2 is thrown out at the plate by a good 15-20 feet. Who would have the call as to weather or not to award R2 home, or just 3rd? I'm assuming U3, the umpire who called the OBS. So, shouldn't PU make a call, then call time, and check to see if U3 is awarding home?  Or, should PU just call time, then take a look at the calling umpire, who, perhaps should be pointing to the base he's awarding, then PU can point the run counts, or call him out?

 

Here's where this gets hairy. If the out would stand, the play should continue. I can tell you in the one time I've had something like this, I was BU calling OBS for R2 being hindered on an outfield hit. R2 tried to score and was thrown out by about a foot. My partner called the out, I called time and awarded home. Had the situation warranted the out to stand, killing the play would have removed the potential for any further action involving BR.

[noumpere]

10 hours ago, Richvee said:

Watching the first clip got me thinking.

In this clip, the play was close, so it's pretty clear, had there been no obstruction by F6, R2 would have scored. 

For the sake of discussion, let's say the obstruction happens exactly as in the first clip. (Obstruction by F6 causing R2 to deviate around F6.). Now let's say R2 is thrown out at the plate by a good 15-20 feet. Who would have the call as to weather or not to award R2 home, or just 3rd? I'm assuming U3, the umpire who called the OBS. So, shouldn't PU make a call, then call time, and check to see if U3 is awarding home?  Or, should PU just call time, then take a look at the calling umpire, who, perhaps should be pointing to the base he's awarding, then PU can point the run counts, or call him out?

 

The crew chief is responsible for weather decisions. 

 

The calling umpire is responsible for "the amount of protection."  Most of the time, especially in four-man, the other umpire will be aware of the call and can make the appropriate call (award or out) when the play happens.  If he doesn't the umpire who called the OBS should make the call.

[Richvee]

13 hours ago, noumpere said:

The crew chief is responsible for weather decisions. 

 

 

I'm embarrassed. 

[BigUmpire]

More bumper stickers from the great one:

·        “No, there does not need to be contact for interference -.mstaylor

 

·        “Obstruction does not require intention". -.mstaylor