Jump to content
  • 0

Fielder Obstruction according to Tim He-who-shall-not-be-named


Guest Anthony
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 1509 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Question

Guest Anthony

Dear All,

I would like to ask you a question. Can you please watch this video (1991 NLCS Game 5)?

(39:05)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzj2SoQi_GM&t=8s

At the end of the play, He-who-shall-not-be-named says:

Brian Hunter tries to grab Don Slaught. And by grabbing Slaught, it would have been interference and Hunter would have scored.

Is it true? First of all, He-who-shall-not-be-named ignores the difference between INTERFERENCE and OBSTRUCTION. But if Hunter had grabbed Slaught, would have the umpire called the obstruction? I was a baseball umpire many years ago. So, it is possible that I have forgotten many of the rules. But, this explanation by He-who-shall-not-be-named doesn't seem right.

What do you think? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 2
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

2 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
16 hours ago, Guest Anthony said:

Dear All,

I would like to ask you a question. Can you please watch this video (1991 NLCS Game 5)?

(39:05)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzj2SoQi_GM&t=8s

At the end of the play, He-who-shall-not-be-named says:

Brian Hunter tries to grab Don Slaught. And by grabbing Slaught, it would have been interference and Hunter would have scored.

Is it true? First of all, He-who-shall-not-be-named ignores the difference between INTERFERENCE and OBSTRUCTION. But if Hunter had grabbed Slaught, would have the umpire called the obstruction? I was a baseball umpire many years ago. So, it is possible that I have forgotten many of the rules. But, this explanation by He-who-shall-not-be-named doesn't seem right.

What do you think? Thanks.

I wouldn't have called the obstruction there. F2 peeled off before the runner reversed directions and wasn't impeding his ability to get to the plate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...