Obstruction question

[FB Fool]

Runner on second, 2 outs, batter hits a weak liner up the middle. runner collides with third basemen between third and home, obstruction was immediately called by ump. no issues there. however batter attempts to go to second because of the obstruction call and is thrown out. huge mess ensues. should the batter have been awarded second as well or just where the obstruction took place? also does the run count since the obstruction happened first?

this was 12u of a lower end tournament affiliation. umps had no clue and honestly either did either team and in the end, ruled the runner out at second end of inning, run didn't count. just curious if this was the correct call?

 

[canyonjoe]

There is no protection for the one not obstructed so batter is out trying to go to 2nd. I would say run doesn't count if out was made at 2nd first but that one I'm not sure of.

 

[mmeece]

Runner on second, 2 outs, batter hits a weak liner up the middle. runner collides with third basemen between third and home, obstruction was immediately called by ump. no issues there. however batter attempts to go to second because of the obstruction call and is thrown out. huge mess ensues. should the batter have been awarded second as well or just where the obstruction took place? also does the run count since the obstruction happened first?

this was 12u of a lower end tournament affiliation. umps had no clue and honestly either did either team and in the end, ruled the runner out at second end of inning, run didn't count. just curious if this was the correct call?

I don't entirely understand your description, but the short version is that the batter/runner has nothing to do with the obstruction call on the 3B runner.

 

[Fluid Fastpitch]

I'm going to infer that the umpire made a loud verbal call of obstruction (rather than just signaling) which confused the batter runner?
Shame on the ump for causing confusion, but no, the batter runner isn't entitled to anything.

Am curious though if this becomes a timing play, and if so, as obstruction is on the runner, is it the umpires judgment if the runner would have crossed home before the batter-runner was tagged out?

 

[Sweet Lou]

I believe it's a timing play where the ump can determine if they thought the run could have scored before batted runner was tagged out. That said I'm pretty sure the ump will give the benefit of the doubt to obstructed runner on ruling the run would have scored before the tag out of unprotected runner. It think it would have to be a very obvious case of runner would not have scored to rule otherwise. But maybe an ump has an offical ruling.

 

[Eric F]

It's up to the ump do determine if the R1 would have scored absent the obstruction. If she would have (in the ump's judgement), the run would count. BR is not protected by the obstruction call, and is out at 2B.

For future reference, the only runner protected from being put out is the runner that was obstructed, and only between the bases where the obstruction occurred.

 

[The Man In Blue]

I'm going to infer that the umpire made a loud verbal call of obstruction (rather than just signaling) which confused the batter runner?
Shame on the ump for causing confusion, but no, the batter runner isn't entitled to anything.

Am curious though if this becomes a timing play, and if so, as obstruction is on the runner, is it the umpires judgment if the runner would have crossed home before the batter-runner was tagged out?

As others have already said, the obstruction has nothing to do with the batter-runner, so there is no protection for that runner.

The penalty for obstruction is that the runner may not be put out between the two bases where the obstruction occurred AND the umpire has the discretion to make any award that negates the effects of the obstruction. If the umpire judges the runner would have scored absent the obstruction BEFORE the batter runner was tagged out, the umpire could award home plate and the run. Personally, I'd have to be darned sure to make that award.

@gertrudethemutilator you bring up a point that I personally believe in, but am usually laughed at for. I do not like making a verbal "OBSTRUCTION!" call because I feel it does influence the play. Players tend to associate an umpire yelling something as the end of a play. It's like yelling "FAIR BALL!" ... we do not do that.

 

[marriard]

Runner on second, 2 outs, batter hits a weak liner up the middle. runner collides with third basemen between third and home, obstruction was immediately called by ump. no issues there. however batter attempts to go to second because of the obstruction call and is thrown out. huge mess ensues. should the batter have been awarded second as well or just where the obstruction took place? also does the run count since the obstruction happened first?

this was 12u of a lower end tournament affiliation. umps had no clue and honestly either did either team and in the end, ruled the runner out at second end of inning, run didn't count. just curious if this was the correct call?

Lets look at things that are certain here:

- There is an obstruction call between third and home; that is a delayed dead ball and the runner is protected between third and home, There is NO guaranteed base award.
- Obstruction doesn't protect other runners, so the runner going to second is going to be out.

Ok - runner at 2B is the third out; so now what do I do with the runner who was obstructed:

- Decision 1: What base would the runner have reached safely if it were not for the obstruction? If I decided that she wasn't going to reach home and was going to put the runner, then no run scores.
- Decision 2: I decided the runner would have reached home, so I plan to award home after the play for the obstruction. Now it is a timing play, and I am going to have to decide whether they would have reached home before the out at second actually occurred. That is totally my judgement and I would want to be certain. Have to be there to make that decision. So the run may or many not score depending on what the umpire judges would have happened.


I couldn't find a specific case in my case book to cover this specifically; so I am going to go with the above which is how I would have ruled on the field. And I like when @The Man In Blue has the same post

 

[CoachJD]

@gertrudethemutilator you bring up a point that I personally believe in, but am usually laughed at for. I do not like making a verbal "OBSTRUCTION!" call because I feel it does influence the play. Players tend to associate an umpire yelling something as the end of a play. It's like yelling "FAIR BALL!" ... we do not do that.

Does softball have the two different types of obstruction like baseball? I don't believe it does. Maybe what you describe here comes from baseball umpires who are supposed to verbalize the obstruction call on dead ball obstruction (which makes sense since the ball is dead and the umpire's verbalization won't cause anything weird to happen).

 

[The Man In Blue]

Does softball have the two different types of obstruction like baseball? I don't believe it does. Maybe what you describe here comes from baseball umpires who are supposed to verbalize the obstruction call on dead ball obstruction (which makes sense since the ball is dead and the umpire's verbalization won't cause anything weird to happen).

No, softball does not have the "type 1" and "type 2" obstructions (which I find two types to be silly, but then I also think the automatic base award is silly). Baseball also does not use the "left fist, arm extended" signal though, they teach to point and say "That's obstruction!"

Every softball training and camp I have been to teaches to verbalize the obstruction.