Cody Bellinger Out of Base Path Call by Umpire Cory Blaser, But Was There Obstruction on Arenado?
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 05. 2024
- Called for running out of his base path, Cubs baserunner Cody Bellinger and manager Craig Counsell briefly argued with 3B Umpire Cory Blaser, who ruled Belli ran more than three feet away to avoid Cardinals fielder Nolan Arenado's tag. But on second glance, was it Arenado who was guilty of obstruction prior to the tag attempt? Article: www.closecallsports.com/2024/...
Buy Me a Coffee: www.buymeacoffee.com/closecal...
Patreon: / lindsay715
Discord: / discord
Facebook: / closecallsports
Twitter: / closecallsports
Official Baseball Rules 5.09(b)(1) regarding running more than three feet away to avoid a tag and establishing a base path when the tag attempt occurs (remember, it's not a baseline! There is no such thing as "out of the baseline" -- it's "out of their base path") while OBR 6.01(h)(1) discusses obstruction type 1, which occurs when a fielder without possession of the ball nor in the act of fielding the ball impedes the progress of the runner WHILE a play is being made on the runner (obstruction 2 is when there is no play actively being made on the runner at the time of obstruction). - Sport
Reason number 487 why MLB should be thrilled you’re making these video explanations.
St Louis completely botched that rundown. They should not have been rewarded. Base path call was bad. I am open to seeing obstruction.
They basically rigged that game for the St. Lou Cardinals
@@RukarioEnterprisesLLCwhat exactly is your slanderous accusation?
@@rayray4192 I think he's just saying they blew the call. And they did.
@@popgunandy Umpires are not perfect. Runner should have been out
@@rayray4192 What's your argument for that? This video lays out a pretty good case for obstruction and it's certainly unclear that he veered more then three feet out of the base path even if there wasn't obstruction. What's your evidence?
OMG, it’s starting to sink in! First thing I thought was obstruction. Thanks, Lindsay!!
I am pretty sure in the upcoming seasons players will be coached to run through fielders instead of go around. Try to make that contact and draw the obstruction
If so, they only have the umpires’ lack of ability to make a judgement call to blame, but I could definitely see that happening!
I see this coached at the high school level so, it’s being coached however…instincts are difficult to fight. When a tag is being made most people will instinctually veer. Additionally, you have to ask yourself…how often are players practicing this to re-program themselves to run into a fielder who is “not in the act of fielding” AND how often do you see this in a season? Twice? Don’t get me wrong…in a tight game, this could be the difference between winning and losing and these are professionals but, the infrequency makes it tough to do the “right thing” when the opportunity presents itself…
But in this case he would have just run into a tag and be out 99% of the time, no ump calling that even if it was point of emphasis
@1969EType Also, encouraging basically full collision in a low-contact sport with short tempers ... I'm sure it'll end great
That’s been taught forever…..
Wow. Great analysis as always. Reminds me of a John Madden interview. He was talking about going to a presentation where Vince Lombardi was going to talk about the famed Packer's power sweep. He thought it would last an hour. The presentation lasted over 4 hours. One play. Vince went over the responsibilities of every offense position against every defense he knew of.
That presentation usually lasted for eight hours. Four hours in the morning, an hour for lunch, and four hours in the afternoon.
I soon as I saw this I knew it was going to be on the channel. My first thought when seeing the play the other day, was that's obstruction. And even then, he didn't deviate more than 3 feet from his established base bath at the time of the tag. Awesome job as always.
I'd be willing to give the ump the benefit of the doubt for the 3 feet call, but the obstruction was clearly before the out of the basepath.
ahhhhhh…. My day is complete…. We have a video from Lindsay & CCS
OBS on Arrenando caused the basepath violation against Bellinger. Put runners on 2nd and 3rd.
This is indeed obstruction. He was blocking the way the path for Bellinger. This is obstruction, not interference. Great job Pointing that out Lindsey, and hey, congratulations on getting those copyright claims removed.
I was helping you by telling the MLB saying "Hey, what you're doing is wrong" ya know, I also took part of the copyright strike protest.
Keep up the great work CCS!
This is a great example of why I don't mind slow calls. The third base umpire didn't hesitate for a split second when he called Bellinger out, when it's clear he needed to sift through a couple different rules.
yup 100%, and this had huge game impact. Cubs lost by a run, AND this killed their momentum!
Great point about the obstruction, Lindsay! On first look, I didn't even consider it, but as soon as you said to look at another part, it clicked! Let's talk obstruction! Great breakdown!
A always, brilliant analysis. Thank you.
Thank you for your videos. Your rule analysis is always top notch.
Great video, great explanation on base path and obstruction. Very clear and very well explained.
I think you're right. I missed the obstruction the first time I watched this, because I was so focused on the base path. Great observation.
Very educational video as always. Transformative in nature as well as you take and explain what is going in. Thank you
😊😊
I agree. In fact I was asked about it and I made the comment that it looked like OBS to me.. You just confirmed it.
yay! This was the one I was afraid we were going to miss during the Dark Days of the Copyright Strike. And I agree -- I felt like first, it was obstruction because the call came so late, but if not, that still doesn't look like 3' to me. Thanks for the analysis!
0:26 What about people saying that the base path was established when the shortstop starts running at the runner? I'm not one of them, but I've seen this question asked. Does the base path get reestablished after the ball is thrown and caught, if we determine that the shortstop did a tag attempt?
I didn’t think about that! Thank you!
What part of the runner? According to your explanation it's the runner's feet - what about their centre of gravity which is closer than his feet here because he's leaning inwards. When sliding for a base you only need to touch the bag with an outstretched fingertip - that would be closer still.
First view of this I wondered, why obstruction wasn't considered. Glad this was discussed in the latter half of the video!
Great breakdown Lindsay! There's an opening for you now that Angel retired. I know you'll do so much better
I feel vindicated. I was screaming that's Obstruction!!! Thanks Lyndsey!!
Whoa, great explanation
1. I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment
2. So glad to continue seeing new videos after all that copyright drama. I know it may not be over but I sure hope it is.
3. Thanks for all the hard work you put in to this channel. As a lifelong baseball freak, even I’ve learned so much from you.
Whoo. I think that's a really tight call for obstruction. I don't see Bellinger having to change his angke until the ball is released. I also think it was a tight call for out of the path. I'll defer to U3 on this one
At 4:23, it really doesn't look like he is in the way. The runner is at least twice as far from the infield grass as the fielder. That looks to be a good 2 feet away from his line to the bag. IT is only when the ball is tossed to him that he comes more toward the center of the dirt and into the runner's path.
I think we need to go deeper on "tag attempt." Say Bellinger just runs towards left field and there's like 10 feet of space between him and Arenado. There's no base path yet, but can you attempt to tag someone that far away? How close do you need to be to make a legitimate tag attempt? With no base path defined (yet) Bellinger can literally run all over the field until that happens, so I'm wondering what the requirements for tag attempt are.
I don’t see obstruction but I also don’t see Belinger breaking the three feet rule
Same for me. I didn't even think of obstruction, but also didn't think he was out of the base path, because of his sidesteps before the ball was caught. That step to the outside gave him the room he needed to extend the base path far enough to avoid the tag imo.
R2 would have done well to collide with Arrenado
Absolutely agree. My first thought was the 3B was in his path so the veering to avoid the tag didn't matter. Dead ball, give the runner 3rd and trailing runner 2nd. Great explanation as always.
This is one of the best channels on the gootube! Thanks!!!!
Good breakdown. I agree on the obstruction when you look at the replay. I think the juke move fooled the third base umpire. It is easy to see in real time why the umpire assessed he was out of his base path, but to get there he was not looking out for the obstruction. It is somewhat like he is looking for the “next call” and mixed the setup. Much like the referees missed the UVA double dribble against Auburn in the final 4 game a few years ago.
One thing I don't see here in these comments: STL's SS, rookie Masyn Winn, should have thrown the ball before he did. Arenado moved in anticipation of the throw that he thought would come and ended up having to gesture for the ball to get Winn to throw it. Hopefully the team will practice rundowns more so that all the players, including the young middle infielders, know their roles and how to execute them.
I honestly think the "3ft rule" shouldn't pertain after Bellinger passes Arenado. The tag attempt is over, the runner is no longer "avoiding a tag," they shouldn't be bound to that base path any longer.
Example: Runner 2 on second base and the ball is hit on the ground to the shortstop. The shortstop lunges at the Runner 2 and misses the tag. The shortstop holds the ball. Runner 2 sees no one is at home plate and rounds third to score.
Rounding the bag takes Runner 2 more than 3ft from the direct base path established when the tag attempt was made.
Should the runner be out?
I think the player making the tag has to be between the base and the runner which the umps missed on this specific call and missed the obstruction. This is so the runner can't run around the field without a direction, so if he is 3ft from the path then he is out unless he returns to the previous base. So if the runner is already passed, he can round it without issue. In your example, an outfielder could lunge for a tag and create 3ft which wouldn't make sense either.
so, the short stop catching the ball and started to chase Belli, that is not a tag attempt? That is simply chasing?
You are right. Chasing a runner is not a tag attempt.
It is not a tag attempt cause Belli is going to third, not second. Path is only for the base you are running towards, not from.
@@arzdbacksfann38 it’s not a tag attempt because there is no tag attempt.
Addressing only the base path violation- I agree with Lindsay, if a base path was "established" by Bellinger, it occurred only at the time of the tag attempt (which was when Bellinger was already next to Arrenando) and corresponding missed tag. He was clearly not out of a base path when he initially veered away from the Arrenando, because the he was not in possession of the ball at that time (thus, no tag attempt could be made) and therefore no base path had been established.
The base path exists from the moment of possession through the tag attempt in play.
Here's where Lindsay and I seem to disagree- The fact that Bellinger's momentum took him outside of the so-called base path AFTER the missed tag is irrelevant. At that time, he was not attempting to avoid a tag, and the base path no longer exists after the tag attempt/missed tag. A runner cannot be attempting to avoid a tag after a tag is already missed.
Remember, the runner is out only if "running more than three feet away from the base path to avoid being tagged." At the moment the base path is established (when the process of the tag begins), the runner cannot veer more than three feet to the left or right of the base path for the purpose of avoiding that tag.
The tag attempt on Bellinger ended when the tag was missed, at which point the base path was erased... (until the next base path would have been established on the next attempted tag).
Spot on
Long time watcher, first time questioning. How does that work for a standard rundown scenario? Must the line to the base the runner is approaching always be clear then? Because i don't think that is not the norm during a standard rundown.
I have a feeling this would be an argument either way this call went.
Totally agree 👍
Why didn’t Counsel argue more? The Cubs need someone to fire them up.
What interests me in the basepath analysis is the fact that the 3ft deviation came after the tag.
If you juke 2 ft to avoid the take and then after the tag has been missed run in a fashion that takes you further out of the way, have you actually violated the rule?
Does the basepath analysis apply even after the tag attempt is over? You suggest it does in which case the basepath would actually be set when the rundown began as the SS started chasing the runner away from second base. Yes he is behind the runner but it is still an attempt to make a tag.
It is not a tag attempt cause Belli is going to third, not second. Path is only for the base you are running towards, not from.
Great rules analysis. That said, would you looked at Madrigal's at bat in today's Reds-Cubs game from the bottom of the ninth inning? He was hit by a pitch, but the umpires say the ball hit the bottom of the bat. When you look at the replay, the ball clearly hit his hand. I believe the umpires got that call wrong. Thanks
The distance between the two matters. At what point is the Fielder close enough to the runner to make him alter his path?
The runner is not obstructed until he is actually hindered or impeded. I disagree with Lindsay on OBS, under OBR rules. Under high school rules, that's OBS all day long.
It looks like the Cardinals really need to practice their run-down defense.
So... was the call on the field challenged or was Bellinger simply called out and that was that? Now I'm confused.
I cannot see a 3 ft deviation from established base path. And I'm sure I would have a hard time noticing an obstruction here before being in the act of fielding the throw in the field, in real time.
If I understand Lindsay, Arenado wouldn’t have been guilty of obstruction had he kept his initial position (off the base path) and waited for the throw before his tag attempt?
He is definitely outside 3 feet, but I agree, he was obstructed by the fielder (Arenado) before this happened. But I see why it was not called that way. So may moving parts and an unusual play on some levels.
1st thing after I saw the replay was it's obstruction and nothing I've seen tells me it's not obstruction. Baseline is then irrelevant, and the missed tag is irrelevant.
Running coaches will now tell the players to run at fielders who don't yet have the ball in a rundown. Run into the fielder before possession, obvious obstruction.
Could the Cubs have challenged the call based on the obstruction (not the base path issue)?
so it's not a tag attempt when the initial fielder is running behind Bellinger? Why wouldn't it be?
How come Baez wasn't out in that ridiculous play against the Pirates a couple years ago, when he retreated to home plate after hitting a ground ball? Does the base path extend both directions? Could he have retreated all the way to the backstop? Could Bellinger have retreated to the left field foul wall, as long as he maintained a straight line between the tag attempt location and second base?
very clearly obstruction and not near 3 ft. umpires mad bad call.
"Obstruction struction, what's your function?" - MLB Rules Schoolhouse Rock 2024
I'm not sure about obstruction, it looked like Arenado was at least a little bit to the right (from Arenado's perspective) of Bellinger's base path. I think the 3 ft rule is a very close call either way in this situation, but I think Bellinger did *not* go more than 3 ft. outside of the base path established when Arenado caught the ball. Still, without slow-motion replay I would not have been able to tell, so the initial call seems reasonable.
As usual, you are correct. OBS, not out of the base path
If that was me I have Type A Obstruction and Cody is awarded 3rd! I would like to know if the play stands or was Counsell able to challenge it?
Not obstruction based on the video. The fielder is close to the infield grass which is out of the way of the runner who is outside the line between 2nd and 3rd. He only moves into the path to path to catch and tag. However, it was a horrible play by the fielder who moved towards the throw for some reason rather than staying where he was.
I agree Obstruction.
However when player # 0 is chasing that is attempting to tag.
I'm not sure this can be obstruction, he doesn't "obstruct" until he is in the act of fielding. IK he's in the baseline but you pause at 4:24 and F6 is a good 20 feet away from him... Can you obstruct from 20 feet away? I would say no... I'm not sure he went 3 feet out of his path either. If this were reviewable and I were the reviewer, I would rule it a call stands, but I wouldn't call it on the field.
I think you can obstruct from 20 feet away. Obstruction should be called if he forced the runner to deviate from the path he would have otherwise taken to get to the base. Ironically, the obstruction is what caused the runner to begin deviating before the tag attempt which is what probably kept him within 3 feet of the base path. The umpires got this wrong on both counts in my opinion.
Good call on the obstruction Linds! Hopefully they start getting some good umpires in there, instead of being so money hungry! ❤️
*...let's just clarify it [insert exasperated sigh here] like we always do..."
If the runner already changes direction to avoid the fielder (obstructing or not) before the fielder has possession of the ball, as happened here, can you legitimately "draw the line" between the runner and the base when the ball is caught?
In this case, it appears to me that his momentum from avoiding Arenado is what pushed him further towards the outfield, so that may even fail the "running away from the path to avoid a tag" because he a) wasn't running away from his path, he was continuing on the path he had already established, and b) he was past the fielder and out of reach of the tag attempt to start with (one of the few things the announcers seemed to get right).
The base path is always a straight line from the player to the base. It does not care which angle you are traveling when the base path is established.
I'm not sure about this one. The act of fielding a run down is kind of unique and Arenado is the next guy in line for the run down sequence. But also, Arenado would have had a better chance of getting the out if he'd stayed at third for a throw.
If Bellinger would have headed straight into Arenando he would have definitely got the Obstruction call
Not sure that's the case. The umpire was calling out before he even took in what happened. Seemed his mind was made up.
I definitely didn't think he was out of the base path. That didn't look like more than three feet to me. It's way too close to call. Your analysis for obstruction has convinced me that the fielder obstructed the runner in this instance so the basepath issue is moot.
It seems to me that the run down had already occurred and that Wynne was holding on to the ball to ensure that the runner doesn't run back. Wynne held on to the ball a little too late before he threw the ball to Arenado.
Tbh, I think the umpire drew the line from base to base and made the judgement based on that as the basepath.
Yeah, you sold me, #FreeBeli
MLB shouldn’t be messing with your channel, they should be hiring you!
In my opinion, this is not obstruction. Whether or not the runner is impeded might be a judgement call, but the runner does not move to avoid the fielder until after the ball is thrown, at which point it is necessary for him to be there to field the ball. The rule doesn't say the fielder cannot be in the basepath at all, only that the runner may not be impeded, so if the fielder is far enough away that he is not impeding until after the ball is thrown, is that still obstruction? I would think not.
So my first impression from the eye test says there's no way that was 3 feet. That's about half the length of Bellinger, who is 6'4. I can't see that being the case.
Second, it's another case of players running on instinct instead of with intent. If Bellinger understands the rules and sees that play, there's no reason for him to veer away from Arenado. Bowl the guy over, and it's an obvious obstruction call, and the tag attempt doesn't even happen. Doesn't excuse the bad call, but it makes it far less likely to happen.
Third, going back on that last point, Blaser makes a terrible call on this all the way around. I think Lindsay makes that very clear in this review, and does everything but say it. It's pretty brutal, actually.
I thought it was a bad call when I saw it, but now that I've seen your break down, it was worse than I originally thought.
umpire committed a cardinal sin - and anticipated the action and call instead of watching the action and then making the call. Happens way to often in officiating at all levels. As I always told my crew before kickoff - "see it, see it, . . . call it"
As a cubs fan this makes me more mad lol
At full speed with one look at it, it sure looks likes he’s out of the base path. And obstruction is taking the ”shitty end of the stick”
Disagree about being out of the path after passing the fielder. After you pass the fielder, the tag attempt is over. To have a base path issue, you need a fielder with possession between the runner and the base they are attempting to achieve.
Also, it is quite a stretch to say a fielder has impeded a runner’s progress when the runner is still 6-7 steps away.
To add to that there is a tag attempt at the start of any rundown. If tag attempts have any kind of longevity then the basepath was fixed long before the ball was even thrown to arronado.
So ignoring the obstruction this absolutely would be beyond 3ft under her interpretation of the rule.
@@ericblair5731 It is not a tag attempt cause Belli is going to third, not second. Path is only for the base you are running towards, not from.
@@arzdbacksfann38 Yes. We are all in agreement. The “if” statements are to deny the accuracy of the interpretation.
The base path wasn’t directly towards the base. It was going to right field when he caught it. And he did not go outside the 3 feet. Bad call but also a tough call in real time.
I guarantee the umpire called the base line violation based on a line from second to third.
Clearly doesn’t know the rules like Lin does!
This should be a reviewable call
the umps need to go back to the books it seems
Yeah, even if he goes over 3' later, it's no longer to avoid the tag. I feel the ump borfed it.
What the heck is Arenado even doing? Everything about this runner being called out feels bad
If he holds to the base path, he runs into Arenado. It's Obstruction, award third.
So Bellinger should have kept his path and made contact?
I don't have obstruction, if you watch the video Cody still has a path to the base without running out of the base path. The third baseman was still very close to the infield grass when he was running towards the play.
1) personally, I don’t think that was more than 3ft
2) should’ve been called obstruction
3) I doubt MLB wants players just blowing up a fielder in that situation to not get called for a base path violation
That was less than 3ft
I don't think this is obstruction or out of the base path. This is just play, runner was safe. Umps should let the play develop and afterwards make a replay review or whatever.
What is the MLB definition of "fielding?"
Bellinger should have just run into the third baseman and gotten the obstruction call.
If Bellinger kept running without veering to his right it would obviously be obstruction on Arenado. Most runners however won’t run directly at a fielder.
3rd baseman totally screwed up. Why is he running at the runner who is running towards him?
Is trying to catch a thrown ball "fielding"? Isn't that just catching?
It’s an old term. Fielding a throw is gloving a throw.
At full speed with one look at it, it sure looks likes he’s out of the base path.
I don’t see the obstruction. Arenado started much closer to the infield grass, then was in the process of fielding the ball when Bellinger started to stepped out. Not sure he was out of the baseline and I don’t think that was the right call, but this would have been worse than the Orioles/White Sox call if obstruction would have been called.
How is the SS chasing the runner not considered the initial tag attempt that establishes the base path here? The 3b's attempted tag is the second attempt, and comes long after the runner was already committed to running in a direct path. That seems to be what was called on the field. I agree, there is a good case for obstruction, but i disagree with Lindsay's interpretation of where the base path was established in this case.
SS is covering the path back to 2nd. 3B is covering path toward 3rd base. This is why the path can change dramatically each time the run-down changes direction.
@@MwD676 but the SS was chasing the runner toward 3rd, that was the initial tag attempt that established the path towards 3rd. The runner never changed direction again, except to run around the 3b.
@@michaelroth5562 It is not a tag attempt cause Belli is going to third, not second. Path is only for the base you are running towards, not from.
@@arzdbacksfann38 but you don't have to be in front of someone to be attempting a tag. You can still try to tag someone from behind, and that's clearly what the SS was doing when he was chasing the runner towards 3rd, which is why the base path to 3rd was established when R2 started running away from the SS.