Obstruction - back to 3rd

[Iluvblue]

And where was the runner when she slowed?

We know that she started at 3rd and went home on a grounder to 2nd base. So she was either obstructed by 3rd baseman or catcher on her way home...... so far, no way she goes back to third.


Doesn't say, does it?


Not hard to deduce where it happened.... see above.

Sounds like it was long before any play at home.

Sounds like it???? read the OP, couldnt have been that long before the play, this kid wasnt trying to score from 1st base.


And maybe at that point, the umpire judged that the runner would not had made home safely.

If that is what he judged on a BOOM BOOM play at he plate, look at the pics to see how close it was, he would have judged incorrectly.


You don't know. Again, you have to see the whole play.


No way do I need to see it... only an umpire trying to cover a terrible call would say you need to see the entire play. Just read the OP, look at the pic, and use some common sense.

[MTR]

And where was the runner when she slowed?

We know that she started at 3rd and went home on a grounder to 2nd base. So she was either obstructed by 3rd baseman or catcher on her way home...... so far, no way she goes back to third.


Doesn't say, does it?


Not hard to deduce where it happened.... see above.

Sounds like it was long before any play at home.

Sounds like it???? read the OP, couldnt have been that long before the play, this kid wasnt trying to score from 1st base.


And maybe at that point, the umpire judged that the runner would not had made home safely.

If that is what he judged on a BOOM BOOM play at he plate, look at the pics to see how close it was, he would have judged incorrectly.


You don't know. Again, you have to see the whole play.


No way do I need to see it... only an umpire trying to cover a terrible call would say you need to see the entire play. Just read the OP, look at the pic, and use some common sense.

Nevermind, you aren't worth the trouble. Hope others have picked up something so these keystrokes were not wasted on someone so clueless.

[Iluvblue]

.

[AlwaysImprove]

I want to ask a question around a more clear situation. Runner on third. Third baseman does not obstruction the runner. Ball hit to SS. Runner comes home, slides. Catcher obstructs runner, then tags. Is there a valid structure in the rules that puts the runner back on third base?

I have had very good umpires explain to me that there is no way the runner ends up on third. They are either safe at home from obstruction, or an out.

I have seen a number of times where, for some reason, which I am not understanding, blue puts the runner back on third. What in the rules allows the runner to be placed back on 3b.

[UmpSteve]

I want to ask a question around a more clear situation. Runner on third. Third baseman does not obstruction the runner. Ball hit to SS. Runner comes home, slides. Catcher obstructs runner, then tags. Is there a valid structure in the rules that puts the runner back on third base?

I have had very good umpires explain to me that there is no way the runner ends up on third. They are either safe at home from obstruction, or an out.

I have seen a number of times where, for some reason, which I am not understanding, blue puts the runner back on third. What in the rules allows the runner to be placed back on 3b.

The rules require the umpire to award the runner the base the umpire judges the runner would have achieved if not obstructed. The runner cannot be out between the two bases, but doesn't get an additional or punitive award, just what the umpire judges would have been attained if not obstructed.

So, despite what you have been told, and despite what Iluvblue refuses to consider, if the PU sees obstruction between third and home, but judges that the runner would have been out even without the obstruction, 1) the runner cannot be out if obstructed, 2) the runner cannot be awarded home if the umpire judges the runner would have been out anyway!!. In that case, since the runner cannot be out (obstructed between those two bases), and cannot be awarded home (umpire judges runner would have been out, any way) the runner must be returned safely to third.

To add: MTR's point is that no one can reasonably make that decision based on a single still shot. See what you want to believe, but you didn't see everything.

[Iluvblue]

What I see is a play at the plate, that IF the kid is even out, that is one helluva a close play...... talking fractions of a second here (and about 1/10 of a second equates to about 2 feet for a decent runner). So if that kid was slowed down by the third baseman BLOWING on that kid as she ran by, and it slowed her at all, that was enough in this picture to have kept her from scoring.


So yes, since blue CALLED obstruction, i cant see how ANY reasonable person can look at the picture and reasonably think that ANY obstruction on that runner isnt the difference. She damn near scores anyways, and that is super close regardless of an obstruction happening or not. So I guess what I am really saying is that this umpire is crazy if he thinks he can say that the kid would not have score anyways on this play. Only way to know that would be to have footage, and break it down with still frames and start breaking down the kids speed and distance traveled before obstruction and after... so maybe he is just damn good and can make that decision, so on something this close what he actually did was REWARD the defense...... I call bullshit.

[AlwaysImprove]

I want to ask a question around a more clear situation. Runner on third. Third baseman does not obstruction the runner. Ball hit to SS. Runner comes home, slides. Catcher obstructs runner, then tags. Is there a valid structure in the rules that puts the runner back on third base?

I have had very good umpires explain to me that there is no way the runner ends up on third. They are either safe at home from obstruction, or an out.

I have seen a number of times where, for some reason, which I am not understanding, blue puts the runner back on third. What in the rules allows the runner to be placed back on 3b.

The rules require the umpire to award the runner the base the umpire judges the runner would have achieved if not obstructed. The runner cannot be out between the two bases, but doesn't get an additional or punitive award, just what the umpire judges would have been attained if not obstructed.

So, despite what you have been told, and despite what Iluvblue refuses to consider, if the PU sees obstruction between third and home, but judges that the runner would have been out even without the obstruction, 1) the runner cannot be out if obstructed, 2) the runner cannot be awarded home if the umpire judges the runner would have been out anyway!!. In that case, since the runner cannot be out (obstructed between those two bases), and cannot be awarded home (umpire judges runner would have been out, any way) the runner must be returned safely to third.

To add: MTR's point is that no one can reasonably make that decision based on a single still shot. See what you want to believe, but you didn't see everything.

Ah, thanks so much for the understanding! That helps a ton. I knew I was not seeing something.

Unfortunately, in the cases where I have seen runners end up back at third it was different than an obstructed runner looked like they were going to be put out.

It was less experienced blues, when met with a normal obstruction call. To me, and I am assuming a bit here, but it seems this happens with umpires coming from baseball, where full collisions are allowed. This usually comes up in the situation when the runner would have made the base except for the obstruction, and the obstruction is so bad that the runner never makes it to the base. They seem to have a hard time following through with full 'obstruction, runner is safe at home' part of the obstruction call. So they wimp out and put the runner back at third.

[ajaywill]

What I see is a play at the plate, that IF the kid is even out, that is one helluva a close play...... talking fractions of a second here (and about 1/10 of a second equates to about 2 feet for a decent runner). So if that kid was slowed down by the third baseman BLOWING on that kid as she ran by, and it slowed her at all, that was enough in this picture to have kept her from scoring.


So yes, since blue CALLED obstruction, i cant see how ANY reasonable person can look at the picture and reasonably think that ANY obstruction on that runner isnt the difference. She damn near scores anyways, and that is super close regardless of an obstruction happening or not. So I guess what I am really saying is that this umpire is crazy if he thinks he can say that the kid would not have score anyways on this play. Only way to know that would be to have footage, and break it down with still frames and start breaking down the kids speed and distance traveled before obstruction and after... so maybe he is just damn good and can make that decision, so on something this close what he actually did was REWARD the defense...... I call bullshit.

Thanks for making MTR's point.....

[Iluvblue]

Actually, quite the opposite of making his point. The ONLY WAY TO SEND runner BACK is if you had footage so you could come to this blue's conclusion, not the other way around.

[playball13]

Here is the link to the video. No OBS occurred before start of this video. R1 foot is on HP when catcher gets up. Looks like R1 hits left shin of F2 before ball arrives based on photo. PU is off screen to the left, with left arm out and no safe/out signal on the play. My main question was can the PU put a runner back at 3rd on an OBS play at the plate. With this discussion I take that as a YES. Was it the right call here. Based on my view here, No. Based on the PU view, maybe. But his judgement is all that matters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZm2B9DkxdQ