Type 2 OBS at 1B

[User167]

No runners, I'm BU, BR gets a base hit to shallow right center, I pivot in, after BR rounds 1B I see OBS on the 1st baseman, point and call the OBS, BR continues to 2B and is thrown out easily by at least 5', I bang him out.

1B base coach comes out to complain the 1st baseman obstructed his runner, I said "yes I saw and called the OBS, but on that kind of OBS, I have to judge would the result of the play have been different without the OBS. I feel he still would have been out at 2B because your runner didn't slow down, didn't break stride, didn't alter his path, made no contact, the only thing he did was maybe had to dip his left shoulder as he ran by the 1st basemen, had the play at 2B been much closer, perhaps I would have changed my decision"

Did I get this right?

[834k3r]

Depends upon ruleset. FED gives an automatic base for OBS (2-22-1 and 8-3-2). OBR, that's the call I would make.

[MadMax]

5 hours ago, User167 said:

after BR rounds 1B I see OBS on the 1st baseman, point and call the OBS, BR continues to 2B and is thrown out easily by at least 5', I bang him out.

Did the BR continue to 2B because you “point(ed) and call(ed) OBS”? 

By your account of events, I’d say that he did. Because if you say he didn’t… as you do in your explanation to the coach: 

5 hours ago, User167 said:

“I have to judge would the result of the play have been different without the OBS. I feel he still would have been out at 2B because your runner didn't slow down, didn't break stride, didn't alter his path, made no contact, the only thing he did was maybe had to dip his left shoulder as he ran by the 1st basemen, had the play at 2B been much closer, perhaps I would have changed my decision"

Then why did you call (and point) OBS?? 
For this? This “dip of the shoulder”? 🤔 Based on the rest of the description, that “dip of the shoulder” – that “maybe” did/didn’t affect the outcome – doesn’t warrant an OBS call. 

5 hours ago, User167 said:

Did I get this right?

No. You would have had more success had you either: 

A) called OBS and awarded a base (2B), or… 

B) not called OBS at all. 

At the amateur level, you can’t openly call OBS and then justify not enforcing / applying / awarding it. 

[SeeingEyeDog]

@User167, this may be the best breakdown of obstruction I have read on the internet...

https://www.umpirebible.com/index.php/rules-fielding/obstruction#:~:text=In NFHS%2C obstruction is always,the point of the obstruction.

~Dawg

 

[The Man in Blue]

Now I will point out another flaw in MLB’s wording … “If a play is being made on an obstructed runner … “

Did you have an obstructed runner?  Yes, you called it.

Was a play made on the obstructed runner?  Yes, you said he was tagged out.

Ergo … base award.

I think we are commonly misreading Type 1 and Type 2 to indicate the obstruction occurring during a play or not during a play.  That isn’t how it is worded.  Type 2 would be if a runner does not go as far as he would have, but is not played on (and this could not be tagged out).

[Jimurray]

4 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

Now I will point out another flaw in MLB’s wording … “If a play is being made on an obstructed runner … “

Did you have an obstructed runner?  Yes, you called it.

Was a play made on the obstructed runner?  Yes, you said he was tagged out.

Ergo … base award.

I think we are commonly misreading Type 1 and Type 2 to indicate the obstruction occurring during a play or not during a play.  That isn’t how it is worded.  Type 2 would be if a runner does not go as far as he would have, but is not played on (and this could not be tagged out).

The MLBUM clarifies with the use of "WHILE" to clear up any misread as yo have done while changing the wording from "was a play made" while the rule says "a play is being made".

[The Man in Blue]

On 9/30/2023 at 7:16 PM, Jimurray said:

The MLBUM clarifies with the use of "WHILE" to clear up any misread as yo have done while changing the wording from "was a play made" while the rule says "a play is being made".

Golly gee, Mr. Cleaver … if only the rule book actually said that.  (Directed at MLB, not you @Jimurray.)

[Vegas_Ump]

I have seen the following--both in Pros:

1. R2 rounds 3B and is obstructed.  He's hustling home but gets thrown out at the plate, but PU enforces Type 2 OBS and rules HAD THE RUNNER NOT BEEN OBSTRUCTED, he likely would have beaten the throw.  (Benefit to the obstructed runner.)

2. R2 rounds 3B and is obstructed (U3 calls it loud and clear!)  R2 slows to a trot and the throw beats him by a mile!  Out at the plate!  The Out was sustained because had the runner NOT been obstructed, his slowing down would have still cost him the out. (Punish stupidity whenever possible.)

I put these examples up to give context to the OP:  If the BR is hustling to get to 2B, I could easily make the case his being obstructed is the reason he was tagged 5 feet away.  SAFE at 2B.  My tendency would be to give the benefit of the doubt to the runner--if he's hustling!  Point is, if you call OBS Large and in Charge, you better have your explanation ready for the manager that gets in your face--either way.

Mike

Las Vegas

[beerguy55]

On 9/29/2023 at 9:38 AM, User167 said:

your runner didn't slow down, didn't break stride, didn't alter his path, made no contact

Then where's the obstruction?  ie. did F3 truly "hinder" the batter/runner?

If you're going to call OBS it better be obvious.

And if you're going to call an obstructed runner out at the very next base he better be out by 20 feet.

If you're truly talking being thrown out by a couple steps it's virtually impossible to say "yeah he was obstructed, and it didn't really matter"...you try to make this case you're eating a SH*#burger.  Your job is hard enough without you making it harder.