Interference, trailing runner put out

[ValleyUmp]

Longtime lurker, active umpire. NFHS rules. R1/R2, 2 out.

Clean, sharply hit single to the outfield. R2 rounds third. An accurate throw home beats R2 by 20 feet. R2 stops and reverses course.

In the ensuing rundown between 3B and HP, R2 is obstructed. PU properly calls and signals, "That's obstruction!" but it's NFHS (delayed dead ball) so play on. Note: No one involved in the play argued the obstruction call itself; everyone agreed it was genuine.

After the act of obstruction, R2 made it back to the 3B bag without being tagged out - only to find it occupied by R1.

R1, knowing the trail runner is the one in jeopardy whenever two runners occupy a base, now attempted to retreat to 2B. (The batter-runner had remained at 1B.) One quick snap throw and R1 is tagged out for Out #3.

Time is called. PU scores R2 on the obstruction and awards R1 third base, intending to continue play with R1/R3, 2 out.

DHC comes out to argue, saying R1 should've seen/heard the obstruction call and known he could remain on 3B; moreover, since it's a timing play and the 3rd out was recorded (on R1) before R2 could be awarded home, the inning should be over with no runs scoring. DHC is not profane, but his argument is persistent and prolonged - he's adamant PU has misapplied the rule - and PU ends up ejecting DHC.

Most of the umpires I've talked to say that neither one was right: R2's run award counts, then the third out applies and it's side retired.

Which of the three perspectives is correct? I was not personally involved but want to know the rulebook support.

[noumpere]

Well, the coach is wrong.

 

Either the umpire on the game OR the "other umpires" you asked could be correct.  8-3-2 says to "award bases that would nullify the obstruction."  That requires judgment and knowing the exact sequence of play.

[beerguy55]

19 hours ago, ValleyUmp said:

DHC is not profane, but his argument is persistent and prolonged - he's adamant PU has misapplied the rule - and PU ends up ejecting DHC.

This is why we protest - no need to persistently prolong anything.

19 hours ago, ValleyUmp said:

DHC comes out to argue, saying R1 should've seen/heard the obstruction call and known he could remain on 3B

Not really relevant, IMO.  We allow all kinds of "normal" baserunning regardless of what the runner should have been able to hear or know.  We allow R1 to return to first though he "should know" he was out at second.  We allow B/R to continue all the way around the base though he "should know" the fly ball was caught.  

19 hours ago, ValleyUmp said:

since it's a timing play and the 3rd out was recorded (on R1) before R2 could be awarded home, the inning should be over with no runs scoring.

My understanding is, since this is NFHS, the obstructed runner in this scenario is "guaranteed" home, so the timing of the third out doesn't matter.  Imagine a scenario where F2, without the ball, just completely plays halfback and blocks the runner who is trying to score, to give his team a chance to make a third out on another runner...

 

I'm scoring R2 and calling R1 out.  Nobody interfered with R1 - R1 ran the bases during a live ball and assumed the risks therein.

[Velho]

Similarly NFHS play I had brought to me where F5 OBA R2 sliding into 3B. U3 (4 man in this case) signaled OBS. R2 was tagged before the bag and assumed they were out so started to walk away. F5 chased her, small rundown and (original) R2 was tagged while off the base. Umpire let the out stand.

I'm interested to hear from the HS folk on how they think about "nullifying the obstruction" in these plays.

 

Edited May 27 by Velho
Fixed R2/R3 confusion; NFHS

[jimurrayalterego]

57 minutes ago, Velho said:

Similarly I had a play brought to me where F5 OBA R2 sliding into 3B. U3 (4 man in this case) signaled OBS. R2 was tagged before the bag and assumed they were out so started to walk away. F5 chased her, small rundown and R3 was tagged while off the base. Umpire let the out stand.

I'm interested to hear from the HS folk on how they think about "nullifying the obstruction" in these plays.

 

Assuming R2 and R3 is the same runner and this was not NFHS, that would be Type 1 OBS and dead ball immediately with R2 awarded 3B. If NFHS I would think I would call the ball dead at the end of playing action which could be the original tag but if play was allowed to continue an award of 3B to R2 would nullify the OBS at the end of playing action.

[Velho]

21 minutes ago, jimurrayalterego said:

If NFHS I would think I would call the ball dead at the end of playing action which could be the original tag but if play was allowed to continue an award of 3B to R2 would nullify the OBS at the end of playing action.

Thanks. Too bad you weren't on this person's game. LOL. They called the runner out for being tagged off the bag.

What about OP?

[jimurrayalterego]

18 minutes ago, Velho said:

 

What about OP?

Need to have been there.

[Velho]

Since we're diving into HS OBS in the other thread, anyone else have anything on OP? Restated here for discussion purposes:

 

NFHS rules. R1/R2, 2 out.

Single to RF, R2 touches 3B. F9 to F2, R2 gets in rundown. R2 is obstructed. PU calls and signals, "That's obstruction!".

R1 advances to 3B and R2 returns safely to 3B. R1 believes he is in jeopardy since it is R2's base and is tagged out retreating to 2B. BR stayed at 1B.

Playing actions stops.

Based on Interps, R2 scores.

What do you do with R1?

[The Man in Blue]

The tag does not necessarily signify an out, it signifies the point where the delayed dead ball becomes a dead ball.

In the OP, I'm scoring R2 and leaving R1 on third base, but there is more to this that is HTBT.  R1 had legally obtained third base, and the obstruction resulted in both being on the same base.  Since this is what led to the misbelief that R1 needed to go back, nullify the obstruction. 

OR (this is the HTBT part) . . . if you don't believe R2 would have scored and this is where we would have ended up without the obstruction, award R2 home and call R1 out.  I just have a hard time with the concept of rewarding the defense for an obstruction.

In your softball scenario, that umpire was a fool.  When the already obstructed runner was tagged on the slide, the ball became dead.  There is nothing after that except the base award.

[BLWizzRanger]

9 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

OR (this is the HTBT part) . . . if you don't believe R2 would have scored and this is where we would have ended up without the obstruction, award R2 home and call R1 out.  I just have a hard time with the concept of rewarding the defense for an obstruction.

The rundown and obstruction occurred between third and home.  You don't get to 'believe' R2 would have scored.  You award the one base from the last base the runner legally obtained.  

But, in this case, since the R2 will be awarded home, do you consider R2 'legally obtaining' home even though they haven't completed their base running duties?  And such, R1 legally obtained third base since R2 legally obtained home?

And I think this is still logically in-line, I have R2 scoring on award and R1 out due to their base running blunder of leaving the base they legally obtained. The ball isn't dead and the defense has the ability to record outs.

[The Man in Blue]

13 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

The rundown and obstruction occurred between third and home.  You don't get to 'believe' R2 would have scored.  You award the one base from the last base the runner legally obtained.  

Correct, R2 is getting home on the obstruction.  I was referring to considering this in relation to where R1 ended up -- in other words, if you believe R2 would not have scored and would have retreated to third base (in which case it is not a product of the obstruction).

The obstructed runner is getting a base award; all other runners are getting a "nullification of the obstruction."  So the question you have to really ponder is "where would R1 have ended up?"  If you believe R1 would have stopped at second base and did not advance until the obstruction led to the rundown, then his being "tagged out" was a result of the obstruction.  If you believe R1 would have obtained third, then you need to determine if the obstruction led to the rundown led to the stacking on the base . . . 

. . . I know an old lady who swallowed a fly . . . 

[BLWizzRanger]

I have to be honest, I have never thought of how an obstruction has affected a trailing runner.  Especially when R2 was in a run-down before the obstruction. And the general rule of thumb is when a leading runner is in a run-down, the trailing runner hustles to get to the next base.  We see this all the time, sans the obstruction.

So tell me again how an delayed  dead ball obstruction affects a trailing runner? 

[beerguy55]

12 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

If you believe R1 would have stopped at second base and did not advance until the obstruction led to the rundown, then his being "tagged out" was a result of the obstruction.  If you believe R1 would have obtained third, then you need to determine if the obstruction led to the rundown led to the stacking on the base . . . 

According to the OP the OBS occurred DURING the rundown - ie it didn't cause the rundown. 

11 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

nd the general rule of thumb is when a leading runner is in a run-down, the trailing runner hustles to get to the next base.  We see this all the time, sans the obstruction.

The wrinkle is, there are two out in this scenario, so there's no real benefit to trailing runners advancing as far as they can unless the runner scores, and you're preventing/hindering the runner in the rundown half of his options to achieve safety by advancing to third base...for no benefit.  But I doubt many amateur players (or even pros) are thinking of this in real time.

Now, it sounds like R1 advanced to third regardless of this consideration - likely just on autopilot.   That is, R1 was on third base regardless of the act of OBS.  R1 either advanced to third on the original hit/throw (just as R2 was advancing to home) OR R1 advanced to third, or finalized his advancement to third, due to the rundown...independent of the OBS that hindered R2. 

What we don't know is, which direction was R2 going when he was obstructed during the rundown.  That matters to determining "what would have happened to R1" if no OBS had occurred.  If he was going towards home, then R2 would have just scored, and R1 would be standing on third base.  However, if he was going towards third, then R2 would have reached third base...and then R1 would have been in jeopardy for also being on third base.

 

Speculation Ahead

In my mind's eye, R1 is at (or very close to) third base during the rundown, and in R2's attempt to get back to third he is hindered, but gets back successfully anyway, resulting in R1/R2 standing on third base. 

For me, this puts the third out on R1 for being tagged after he tries to go back to second (doesn't really matter if he even left the base, as long as he was tagged), and scores R2 for his OBS award between third and home (even though he doesn't eventually actually touch home until after R1 made the third out). 

[Velho]

This is NFHS OBS delayed dead ball rule is sounding more and more like the runner halfway to the next base advance/retreat rule I got drug into and did in 8U last night...