Can anyone explain the call

[bdnewton]

Yesterday. The bases were loaded. Beard was on second. He has the right for his lane to get to 3rd base. TCUs shortstop ran into Beard. The umps called the obstruction on Beard. That seemed to me as the wrong call. What am I missing?

 

[Bardman]

No idea. It was pretty clear the defensive player initiated the contact. Heck, he was setup next to the runner. Pretty sketchy call IMO where it was clear the defensive player was not going to make a play. I thought our run should have counted.

 

[bdnewton]

I agree.

 

[fredburgcard_rivals157045]

There’s a comment to rule 6.01(a) “ Interference” which states that a runner who interferes with a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a ball in play is out regardless of whether or not the runner intended the contact.

The only issue is whether the fielder was moving towards the ball in play

 

[earsky]

There’s a comment to rule 6.01(a) “ Interference” which states that a runner who interferes with a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a ball in play is out regardless of whether or not the runner intended the contact.

The only issue is whether the fielder was moving towards the ball in play

Yes it's totally within the judgement of the umpire, whether or not the defense is attempting to get to the ball.

 

[CardX]

Our guys need to Albert Belle their asses. If you’re going to get called for obstruction, make it count.

That trip to Texas wasn’t perfect, but, damn, things went very well. 3-0 against good competition.

 

[earsky]

Our guys need to Albert Belle their asses. If you’re going to get called for obstruction, make it count.

That trip to Texas wasn’t perfect, but, damn, things went very well. 3-0 against good competition.

Yeah, good news is they can still get better

 

[cocoa]

Our guys need to Albert Belle their asses. If you’re going to get called for obstruction, make it count.

That trip to Texas wasn’t perfect, but, damn, things went very well. 3-0 against good competition.

Nothing is ever perfect, but darn going to TX and winning three games against solid programs, is pretty darn close to it CardX! What more could you want? 3 shutout no hitters?? LOL!!

 

[CardX]

Nothing is ever perfect, but darn going to TX and winning three games against solid programs, is pretty darn close to it CardX! What more could you want? 3 shutout no hitters?? LOL!!

I was specifically speaking of letting the foot off the gas against A&M, when we could have run ruled them. The Cards also should have put up 6-7 runs against TCU, but base running kept it close. Today’s game, however, was perfection.

All in all, yes, outstanding. Great road trip.

 

[earsky]

but base running kept it close.

There it is. I wouldn't expect it to be perfect from youngsters,but I definitely expect the vets on this team to be on point. It's something I'm sure Mac will try to clean up daily at practice.

 

[jpa2825]

Yesterday. The bases were loaded. Beard was on second. He has the right for his lane to get to 3rd base. TCUs shortstop ran into Beard. The umps called the obstruction on Beard. That seemed to me as the wrong call. What am I missing?

The only "right for his lane" is the last 45' between home and 1st. Batter runner needs to be in that lane. Everywhere else, as the rule quoted above states, the runner must not interfere with the fielder's ability to play the ball, whether he's in a direct line between 2B and 3B or not. Always a judgment call and even tougher for the 2B umpire as it happened behind him (he was in front of the drawn in infielders) and his head was on a swivel. Tough break. In hindsight, runner should just have been playing deeper than the infielder to provide more time to react to the batted ball. Really took the steam out of the rally.