Skip to main content

9 replies

Cubs vs. White Sox Obstruction...Guillen Ejected

J johntaine2110+ posts
Ozzie Guillen was write to have a problem with this call and let me tell you why...
First, watch the video on www.whitesox.com where it says "Guillen gets ejected" (right under the big picture on the main page)

After watching the video, I think that Joe West, the Umpire in Chief, who seemed to take the lead in the discussion on the field, as he should, made the wrong call.

This is of course type B obstruction...here is what it says in the rulebook for this...

(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 his judgment will nullify the act of obstruction.
Rule 7.06(b) Comment: Under 7.06(b) when the ball is not dead on obstruction and an obstructed runner advances beyond the base which, in the umpire’s judgment, he would have been awarded because of being obstructed, he does so at his own peril and may be tagged out. This is a judgment call.

Now, I know this is a judgement call, but give me a break, the runner on third had stopped, and in MY judgement, and I know it is only mine, the runner was not going to make it to third, but he could never had made it to third because the runner that was on third was staying there. The obstruction at second had no bearing on why the runner continued to third, it was simply bad base running. In this case, the obstruction should have been ignored because the runner made it to the base that they would have if it were not for the obstruction anyway. Since the runner on third held up, the runner on second could have only been at second.

VERY BAD JUDGEMENT...I DO NOT THINK THAT THIS WAS A HARD SITUATION TO FIGURE OUT...THERE ARE FOUR OF THEM!

If I am missing something here, which I may, by all means, let me hear it...
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Michael S. TaylorMichael S. Taylor1,000+ posts
They made the right call but did it wrong. The U2 and U3 called the obstruction. The runner rounded second and collided with the SS. At that point it is type B obstruction and play continues. The umpires are to watch the play and decide where to protect the runner. In this case, because the runner held at third the runner had to return to second. Evidently they decided that was his protected base. When he was thrown out there they should have killed the play and placed him there. For whatever reason they didn't, allowed it to continue and ended up iwth a runner at second and two outs.
Now everybiody is blaming Joe West for it but if you watch the video, as soon as the play is done the U2 is calling for a meeting. At that point Joe pieces it together and delivers the bad news. And as usual Ozzie didn't take it well and got himself tossed.
The announcers, who I don't know who it was, were beside themselves, saying it was the worse call they had ever seen and the umpires completely lost it. They never once mentioned that it was an obstruction call or anything that related to the play to substantiate their claim. They simply ranted about the idiot umpires.
Now. as far as the call itself, I don't know that I would have protected the runner back to second because he went almost to third. A case could be made that he had overrun his protection. But since they did then they enforced it correctly.
LonBlue67LonBlue67100+ posts
when the obstructed runner (type B) is played upon and does not reach his protected-base, the play is killed immediately and runners are placed.

since they apparently protected the runner to Second and he was tagged out trying to return to Second, the play should have been killed then, but wasn't for whatever reason.

Like MST said, correct ruling, bad process getting there.
Last edited by LonBlue67
Michael S. TaylorMichael S. Taylor1,000+ posts
The runner wasn't obstructed until he went past second. The obstruction occured between R2 and the SS. At that point the umps will protect him either to second or third. Since the R3 was held second is the only choice.
Once he was tagged out at second they should have killed the play but they didn't. This is the exact reason you kill it, to prevent a cluster.
The rule actually says to allow play to continue until no further play is possible, which is what they did. The MLBUM says kill it when the obstructed runner is called out before reaching his protected base, which is what they didn't do.
LonBlue67LonBlue67100+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by johntaine21:
LonBlue,
But he already reached his protected base, second, then decided to go past it, and then went back, that is when he was tagged out.


I hear you, and can only say that signals are mixed on this. J/R has a case play where R2 is obstructed going to Third, he rounds Third "aggressively" and is tagged out diving back to Third, yet J/R says "R2's return to Third is protected." (page 123 in my version)

so I can't give you a straight answer on that. Type B Obstruction is one of the hardest rules to understand out of a book, much less apply on the field in a matter of a few seconds.
Last edited by LonBlue67
J johntaine2110+ posts
MST,
I know he had got obstructed, but thought it was right on second, the clip I saw did not have the best angle and I thought that since it happened on the bag, he was only protected right then and there, not on a retreat to second. If you enforce this obstruction, I think that I would have killed the play like the mlbum said to do. However, isn't it a judgement call whether to, or not to protect the runner back to the base in this instance since he decided on his own to go to third and did this at his own peril, then went back to the bag. At this point, as an umpire, I cannot see how I can still protect him, at this point, I believe he is off at his own peril. Can I say this or is the a rule book "have to do it this way or it is wrong" deal...just wondering...

Add Reply

Post
.

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
Link copied to your clipboard.
×