Yes it is. No, it isn't.Is that within the spirit of the rule? Would it be reveiwable if she stopped at third?
Yes it is. No, it isn't.Is that within the spirit of the rule? Would it be reveiwable if she stopped at third?
That would be possible but risky. Keep in mind that even with the obstruction call she could still have been ruled out at home. She was only protected between 2B and 3B.To ask another question, did the 3rd base coach send her home expecting an obstruction call?
? ~And yet~That would be possible but risky. Keep in mind that even with the obstruction call she could still have been ruled out at home. She was only protected between 2B and 3B.
She's PROTECTED between 2B and 3B but can be AWARDED home if the umpire judges she could have reached it without the obstruction. With the play being within a step or so at home it seems like the right call to me. However, if she had been out by a wide margin the umpire could have called her out at home because she had achieved the base she was protected to (3B) and advanced at her own risk.? ~And yet~
She was awarded being safe at home!
Nope. I haven't fleshed out all the possible scenarios. I get what you're saying about a 1st base player immediately obstructing the batter on a base hit where the punishment is only a guaranteed single. On the flip side, we wouldn't want an obstructed runner on a bunt down the first base line to run all the way home knowing the obstruction protects her. All I am saying is when any rules committee meets (or however such things are done), this particular situation may be an example where the wording and intent of the rule should be looked at so the game can be played and officiated with the least amount of controversy.Using this logic, if a BR is obstructed just before 1B on a clean triple to deep right corner, you are suggesting she only be awarded 1B? The question an umpire needs to consider is "How long was the runner delayed and how close was the call at the end of the play. " Any other actions, runner stumbling on her own, hesitating, retreating to a base before advancing, are all moot. If it is even close it goes in the runner's favor.
As for the defenses reaction in delaying a throw? They caused the issue, they do not get protection.
Was responding to the previous post you had responded to regarding a coach after observing the oops at 2nd...then taking further advantage of the rule-sets and sending runner home knowing the rule set.She's PROTECTED between 2B and 3B but can be AWARDED home if the umpire judges she could have reached it without the obstruction. With the play being within a step or so at home it seems like the right call to me. However, if she had been out by a wide margin the umpire could have called her out at home because she had achieved the base she was protected to (3B) and advanced at her own risk.
She was protected to home, hence the call to award her the run even though she was thrown out.
Don't see how she was protected at home since the obstruction occurred between 2B and 3B. I assume she was awarded home because that is where the ump felt she would have reached with no obstruction. If they felt that she would not have made it home without the obstruction, and the play played out as it did, then the runner would have been out (ump friends, please correct me).
Alternatively, if the runner had stopped at 3, would the ump have awarded her home if he felt she would have scored without the obstruction?