Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox

Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around?

Posted: 10/27/2013 5:28 AM

Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


Remember our playoff series with Boton?  Think it was '03, but not sure.  Miggy going around 3b, was obstructed, but he stopped, I guess figuring it would be called right away.  He did not get the call, and I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) the ump(s) informed him he should have kept going and scored ... well, I guess crossed home plate ...  then the call would have likely been made.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/27/2013 7:19 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


Little things.  That was also the game where Byrnes started shoving Boston's catcher instead of simply touching the plate and was eventually tagged out.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/27/2013 7:56 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


Karma.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/27/2013 8:39 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


You're absolutely right. I wonder if Miggy had kept running would he have been safe as well? Would the ump had been inclined to, at his discretion, call Miggy safe?

One of the many things that haunt me as I continue his love affair with my A's. #misskarma

---------------------------------------------
--- oaklady wrote:

Remember our playoff series with Boton?  Think it was '03, but not sure.  Miggy going around 3b, was obstructed, but he stopped, I guess figuring it would be called right away.  He did not get the call, and I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) the ump(s) informed him he should have kept going and scored ... well, I guess crossed home plate ...  then the call would have likely been made.

---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/27/2013 8:40 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 



SoDakota wrote: Little things.  That was also the game where Byrnes started shoving Boston's catcher instead of simply touching the plate and was eventually tagged out.
He didn't shove anyone, he was jumping around thinking about his ankle instead of touching the plate while the ball went past the catcher. Then he actually wasn't tagged out because the catcher touched him with an empty glove while holding the ball in his hand.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/27/2013 8:52 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


Ya the first thing I thought of when I saw that was Why the hell didn't Tejada run?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/27/2013 9:22 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 



WaddellCanseco wrote: Ya the first thing I thought of when I saw that was Why the hell didn't Tejada run?
I recall the guys talking about the play and think it was Fosse who mentioned that it seemed a number or most  of the players were unclear on the rule and probably would've reacted similar to Tejada, who apparently thought the obstruction call would be automatic as it happened and he would be "awarded" homeplate under the circumstances.  I thought the same thing; I had no idea because I think that's the first time I'd seen a game where obstruction became an issue.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/27/2013 10:40 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


That was my first thought after seeing the play last night, Oaklady. Brought back bad memories of that A's-Red Sox series, and how close Oakland was to winning that series (as usual). Surprised to see no mention of that infamous Tejada play by the national media, especially since Bosox benefitted from that play and were bitten by it last night.

Last edited 10/27/2013 10:23 PM by APlus100

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/27/2013 11:32 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


I was yelling at the TV, "Complete the f#@$ing play!!!!"

Looks to me like the umps got that call right last night.

Joyce called it the second he saw it. There was no ex-post facto reasoning. He called it right away.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/27/2013 11:58 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 



joshbalt wrote:
SoDakota wrote: Little things.  That was also the game where Byrnes started shoving Boston's catcher instead of simply touching the plate and was eventually tagged out.
He didn't shove anyone, he was jumping around thinking about his ankle instead of touching the plate while the ball went past the catcher. Then he actually wasn't tagged out because the catcher touched him with an empty glove while holding the ball in his hand.
He most certainly did shove Varetik, who at the time didn't have the ball.  Then, Byrnes jumped around a little and was eventually tagged out.  I tried to find a clip of it, but couldn't find one.  If you get a chance to view it, you'll see what I'm talking about.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/27/2013 12:07 PM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


of course that was the same game lilly pitched great after hudson got in a bar fight and missed his start

rich harden walk off vs trot nixon

A's made 4 errors in that game

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/BOS/BOS200 310040.shtml
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/27/2013 12:18 PM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 



oaklady wrote:
WaddellCanseco wrote: Ya the first thing I thought of when I saw that was Why the hell didn't Tejada run?
I recall the guys talking about the play and think it was Fosse who mentioned that it seemed a number or most  of the players were unclear on the rule and probably would've reacted similar to Tejada, who apparently thought the obstruction call would be automatic as it happened and he would be "awarded" homeplate under the circumstances.  I thought the same thing; I had no idea because I think that's the first time I'd seen a game where obstruction became an issue.
Clearly Allen Craig had no such issue.  It's the players' job to know the rules.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/27/2013 12:49 PM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


Maybe you're right that he initially pushed Varitek. What I remember most is him jumping around next to the plate without touching it and then Varitek tagging him with an empty glove but the umpire not realizing it.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/27/2013 8:14 PM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


Yeah, Byrnes didn't get into a shoving match with Varitek...he injured himself going into the plate and shoved Varitek away in anger and then moved/hopped towards the dugout in pain, not even realizing he hadn't touched the plate and the play was still live. He kind of threw up his arms in resignation/anger when he was tagged and called out.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/28/2013 6:41 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 



Minstrel wrote: Yeah, Byrnes didn't get into a shoving match with Varitek...he injured himself going into the plate and shoved Varitek away in anger and then moved/hopped towards the dugout in pain, not even realizing he hadn't touched the plate and the play was still live. He kind of threw up his arms in resignation/anger when he was tagged and called out.

Yes, that's pretty much the way I remember it, too.  But that was the series which made me a Boston hater, which started with the fans and a number of very unprofessional Boston players joining in on the Lilly jeer/cheer.  I thought that was the most unprofessional happening I've ever seen on an mlb field.   Until then, the Red Sox used to be my 2nd favorite team in the AL.  Since that series I've rooted for the Yankees over Boston, mainly because I consider them much more professional.  I don't care for the Cards (especially Holliday) but I'm rooting for them to win this WS; alas,  don't expect it's going to happen, however. 

   

Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/28/2013 9:02 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


I wish I could find a replay. 

As I remember it, Byrnes slides/tripped/is blocked crossing home plate and the ball squirts away from Varitek.  As I'm yelling at the TV for Byrnes to touch home plate, he shoves Varitek who is trying to find the ball.  Oblivious to what is going on, Byrnes then stamps/hops and limps around while Varitek finds the ball and then tags him out. 

The most frustrating play I had and still have witnessed as an A's fan.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/28/2013 9:19 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 


You can see the Byrnes replay here.

Byrnes shoving Varitek didn't really affect anything, as it's not what prevented him from going back to touch the plate.  Byrnes clearly thought the play was over.

Varitek sticks out his foot to trip Byrnes as he comes to the plate, but that's legal because Varitek was in the act of fielding the throw.

What always bothered me about the play is that when Varitek finally tags him, he tags him with an empty glove while holding the ball up in his other hand.  The whole A's dugout (especially Chavez on deck) should have been yelling at him to go tag home.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/28/2013 9:32 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 



oaklady wrote:
WaddellCanseco wrote: Ya the first thing I thought of when I saw that was Why the hell didn't Tejada run?
I recall the guys talking about the play and think it was Fosse who mentioned that it seemed a number or most  of the players were unclear on the rule and probably would've reacted similar to Tejada, who apparently thought the obstruction call would be automatic as it happened and he would be "awarded" homeplate under the circumstances.  I thought the same thing; I had no idea because I think that's the first time I'd seen a game where obstruction became an issue.
There's nothing in the obstruction rule that requires the runner to get up and keep running.

Here's Rule 7.06(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.

If Tejada would have scored had he not been obstructed, giving him the run would be the best way to "nullify the act of obstruction."  The fact that he started complaining instead of continuing to run home was a direct result of him having been obstructed.  While continuing to run home may have made it easier for the umpire to decide whether or not he would have made it home absent the obstruction, it's not at all a requirement.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/28/2013 11:21 AM

Re: Tonight's obstruction call: What goes around comes around? 



AthertonA wrote: You can see the Byrnes replay here.

Byrnes shoving Varitek didn't really affect anything, as it's not what prevented him from going back to touch the plate.  Byrnes clearly thought the play was over.

Varitek sticks out his foot to trip Byrnes as he comes to the plate, but that's legal because Varitek was in the act of fielding the throw.

What always bothered me about the play is that when Varitek finally tags him, he tags him with an empty glove while holding the ball up in his other hand.  The whole A's dugout (especially Chavez on deck) should have been yelling at him to go tag home.
Yea.  Someone should have been yelling to him to tag the plate.  Then again, the ump is right there not making any kind of call.  If Byrnes would have looked at him, it would have been obvious the ball was still in play.

Another should a/could a/would a regarding A's playoff baseball within the past 10+ years.
Reply | Quote