Obstruction? F1-F2-BR converge on lil' pop-up in front of the plate

[Velho]

 

 

Assuming you declare F1 as the protected fielder, could you get obstruction on the catcher? 

[Velho]

5 minutes ago, Richvee said:

We can assume 2 outs for the sake of discussion

It was no outs.

[humanbackstop19]

22 minutes ago, Mudisfun said:

I agree on F2 doing what he should be doing, but F1 is now in the way...

Makes me think about the Angels game with a pop up along the 1st base line... 2 fielders converged, one was protected and the B/R ran into the other. Ball was dropped and B/R was awarded 1st...

I respect that judgement.  If we're getting anything, I agree it leans more towards OBS than INT, just for the fact of the multiple boots by the defense and they should not be given the benefit of the doubt for any penalty.  I have a hard time rewarding bad baseball, which goes both ways on this play. 

[Mudisfun]

4 minutes ago, humanbackstop19 said:

  I have a hard time rewarding bad baseball, which goes both ways on this play. 

This I 100% agree with... Even if you rule this OBS or INT using strict interpretations of the rules, you are still basically bailing someone out for playing poorly.

[noumpere]

Possible INT on the batter initially -- F2 tries to clear to the left to go after the popup and BR exits the batter's box (not that exiting is required) toward third instead of running toward first.  IF F2 is protected, that's INT.  IF F1 is protected, it's nothing.

 

After that, it's nothing. I don't see BR trying to avoid the (now unprotected) F1 near the end of the clip and F2 is protected at this point.  BR doesn't hinder anyone at this point.

[beerguy55]

2 hours ago, SH0102 said:

I guess I will have to eat crow on this one, but I am having a difficult time understanding the spirit of this rule then.

When I read in the rule book about a fielder being protected after a deflected ball goes to them, I am imagining a line drive off the P's shin, or a first baseman diving at a rocket that tips off the edge of his glove and bounds towards the 2nd baseman.

I am not imagining the dropping and booting of a pop up

Think of it this way...whether it's a line drive that deflects off F1's shin...or F1 drops an easy fly ball...at that moment of touch,  and then as it moves away from F1, in either scenario, it is still a batted ball.   That means all the rules of a batted ball still apply.  For example, if in the OP, the ball came off F1's glove and rolled into the dugout it would be two bases TOP.   The rules of INT/OBS and protected infielders are in play not because it's deflected  or dropped, per se, but because the ball's status is still "batted".

[noumpere]

24 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

Think of it this way...whether it's a line drive that deflects off F1's shin...or F1 drops an easy fly ball...at that moment of touch,  and then as it moves away from F1, in either scenario, it is still a batted ball.   That means all the rules of a batted ball still apply.  For example, if in the OP, the ball came off F1's glove and rolled into the dugout it would be two bases TOP.   The rules of INT/OBS and protected infielders are in play not because it's deflected  or dropped, per se, but because the ball's status is still "batted".

What is true is that the runner is protected from (unintentional) interference with the BALL -- not from interference with the FIELDER.

[Richvee]

2 hours ago, Velho said:

It was no outs.

Then we have an IFF, batter out, he didn't interfere with either fielder so we have nothing. It's a much more interesting play with 2 outs or if the ball was bunted. 

[maven]

4 hours ago, humanbackstop19 said:

If we're getting anything, I agree it leans more towards OBS than INT, just for the fact of the multiple boots by the defense and they should not be given the benefit of the doubt for any penalty.  I have a hard time rewarding bad baseball, which goes both ways on this play. 

WTF does this mean? IF we call something? Leans? That's not officiating, it's pin the tail on the call, flip a coin umpiring.

None of this is relevant to video review and making a call. There's no infraction on this play. Hopefully, they ended up calling the IFF after they figured it out.

[Velho]

2 hours ago, maven said:

Hopefully, they ended up calling the IFF after they figured it out.

R2 & R1 advanced and BR was out at 1st. There was no discussion by anybody.

[humanbackstop19]

On 3/4/2022 at 5:15 PM, maven said:

WTF does this mean? IF we call something? Leans? That's not officiating, it's pin the tail on the call, flip a coin umpiring.

None of this is relevant to video review and making a call. There's no infraction on this play. Hopefully, they ended up calling the IFF after they figured it out.

It simply means there's more OBS that INT in the video when slowed down and replayed time and time again (if we're running the hypothetical of 2 outs). Officiating goes into the gray area of not rewarding SH*#ty defense for creating the mess in the first place.  Still, it's picking boogers watching the benefit of video.  I hold my call on this would be a loud, hard, "That's Nothing!"