Alternate Link: Obstruction no-call follows collision, baseline blocking in Pittsburgh
Thursday, April 10, 2025
Obstruction Should Have Negated Collision Tag Play in PIT
Pirates 3B Ke'Bryan Hayes' made a heads up play to tag out Cardinals runner Thomas Saggese after 1B Endy Rodriguez and catcher Joey Bart collided in Pittsburgh, but should HP Umpire Lance Barksdale have called obstruction on the fielders lying prostrate in the runner's base path?
In short, "yes" and in long form, here's why:
With two out and runners on first and second base, Cardinals batter Willson Contreras hit a high fly ball in front of home plate, whereupon Pirates fielders Rodriguez and Bart collided, dropping the baseball in the process. As the ball rolled loose, Cardinals baserunner R2 Saggese attempted to score, tagged out by 3B Hayes who picked up the ball and tagged the runner before he slid into home plate.
Barksdale called the runner out instead of ruling obstruction on Pittsburgh, even though Rodriguez and Bart, having misplayed the batted ball, lay strewn across the baseline and directly in the path of R2 Saggese. Had obstruction been called, Saggese would have been awarded home and the inning would have continued, likely with R1 Masyn Winn advancing to third base.
The Official Baseball Rules define obstruction as "the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner."
Standing in an advancing runner's path without the ball and not in the act of fielding, thus blocking their direct progress, is very likely obstruction.
As for the act of fielding exemption, this applies to only one fielder: "If two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball...the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule" (OBR 6.01(a)(10)). Although this is found in the offensive interference rule, the point about only one fielder receiving act-of-fielding protection applies here, as well.
Furthermore, a fielder is not considered "in the act of fielding" after the fielder attempts to field the ball and misses, which occurred here as well. Thus, this is obstruction, and because the ball was loose at the time of obstruction, it is Type 2 / B: "If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall then call “Time” and impose such penalties, if any, as in their judgment will nullify the act of obstruction" (OBR 6.01(h)(2)), as no play can be considered as being made on a runner (as in OBS Type 1/A) while the ball is loose (e.g., not in the fielder's possession or not being thrown between teammates).
Video as follows:
Alternate Link: Obstruction no-call follows collision, baseline blocking in Pittsburgh
Alternate Link: Obstruction no-call follows collision, baseline blocking in Pittsburgh
Labels:
Articles
,
Lance Barksdale
,
Obstruction
,
Rule 2.00 [Obstruction]
,
Rule 6.01
,
UEFL
,
Umpire Odds/Ends
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)