MLB Obstruction

[TNCoach]

So MLB Obstruction question.  I'm sure it's been discussed but unable to find.  I think it was 2014.  Dribbler hit to the pitcher/1B.  Both converge.  Batter runner attempted to move to the inside. Ran into pitcher who just fielded the ball.  Obstruction was called. 

 

 

 

I viewed it as with P and 1b, one was protected and one not.  The one who wasn't protected was guilty of obstruction since he caused the fielder to deviate.  

 

 

 

Anyone familiar with this? I believed the umpires were correct.  The other said the umpire was incorrect because both has a right to field, just one wasn't protected.  They said should have been out because he was tagged.  

[Jimurray]

26 minutes ago, TNCoach said:

So MLB Obstruction question.  I'm sure it's been discussed but unable to find.  I think it was 2014.  Dribbler hit to the pitcher/1B.  Both converge.  Batter runner attempted to move to the inside. Ran into pitcher who just fielded the ball.  Obstruction was called. 

 

 

 

I viewed it as with P and 1b, one was protected and one not.  The one who wasn't protected was guilty of obstruction since he caused the fielder to deviate.  

 

 

 

Anyone familiar with this? I believed the umpires were correct.  The other said the umpire was incorrect because both has a right to field, just one wasn't protected.  They said should have been out because he was tagged.  

Solution for Case Play 2014-4: Batter-Runner Obstruction | Close Call Sports & Umpire Ejection Fantasy League

[BigBlue4u]

27 minutes ago, TNCoach said:

Anyone familiar with this? I believed the umpires were correct.  The other said the umpire was incorrect because both has a right to field, just one wasn't protected.  They said should have been out because he was tagged.  

TNCoach, 

The umpire must decide which fielder he is going to protect.  It's not going to be both of them.

If there is contact with the protected infielder, interference. If there is contact with the other fielder, it quite likely could be obstruction.

[Tborze]

18 minutes ago, TNCoach said:

So MLB Obstruction question.  I'm sure it's been discussed but unable to find.  I think it was 2014.  Dribbler hit to the pitcher/1B.  Both converge.  Batter runner attempted to move to the inside. Ran into pitcher who just fielded the ball.  Obstruction was called. 

 

 

 

I viewed it as with P and 1b, one was protected and one not.  The one who wasn't protected was guilty of obstruction since he caused the fielder to deviate.  

 

 

 

Anyone familiar with this? I believed the umpires were correct.  The other said the umpire was incorrect because both has a right to field, just one wasn't protected.  They said should have been out because he was tagged.  

It’s umpire judgement on which fielder is protected. If it’s the play in my mind, F3 caused BR to veer inside right into the tag. It was a bang bang play, but I believe the fact that F1 fielded the ball helped in determining who the protected fielder was. 

[maven]

Sometimes we throw the term 'protected fielder' around without remembering, "protected from what?"

Runners may dictate their own path to the base (think rounding the bases, etc.). Fielders must usually yield the right of way to runners, and if they fail to do so and hinder a runner, they're guilty of OBS.

The exception occurs when a fielder is fielding a batted ball. Then he's protected from his obligation to clear the base path for the runner, because the fielder now has the right of way. 

I couldn't access the video from CCS linked above (seems to have been taken down?), but from the description we have F1 AND F3 in the BR's base path. One of them will be protected, the other won't. So whoever is not protected will be guilty of OBS (with or without a collision—we're watching for hindrance, and a collision is never necessary but usually sufficient evidence of hindrance).

The only other consideration is INT with the protected fielder. Here, unless the BR does something intentionally or prior to the fielder gloving the batted ball, we're probably sticking with the OBS call—as I'm envisioning the play, the collision occurred because of the OBS and during a tag attempt.

[Velho]

 

[Richvee]

16 minutes ago, Velho said:

 

4 minutes and 22 seconds and the only thing those guys said that was correct or was "Good luck arguing with Greg Gibson" 

[The Man in Blue]

I wondered if they were going to bring up the runner's lane . . . of course they did.

 

For discussion sake . . . I'm curious if the assessment the announcer made at the end was incorrectly correct.  They said it (interference -- whoops!) was charged to the pitcher.  Not that it matters in the end (other than to the official scorekeeper), but I agree that the obstruction came from F1, not F3.  If you watch the play, F3 has a straight line on the ball the whole way.  To me, he was the fielder making the play and the one I would protect.  F1 sticks his glove out and snatches the play away.  The fact that F1 ended up with the ball is irrelevant to the protection.