As Guardians batter-runner Brayan Rocchio ran toward first base during a ground ball in Cleveland, he saw a pair of Royals in 1B Salvador Perez and pitcher Daniel Lynch standing in his base path and veered to his left to avoid a tag. 1B Umpire Paul Clemons called Rocchio out for running more than three feet out of his base path to avoid the tag, but did non-fielding pitcher Lynch's presence on the first baseline obstruct Rocchio on his way to first base? Was this indeed out of the base path, or should this have been obstruction instead with Rocchio awarded first base?
Play: With two out and none on, Rocchio hit a soft ground ball up the first baseline, drawing both F3 Perez and F1 Lynch. Perez fielded the ball and BR Rocchio ran to his left to avoid both F1 Lynch and F3 Perez's tag. U1 Clemons called Rocchio out for running more than three feet away from his base path to avoid the tag.
Conflicting Rules: There are two competing rules with opposite penalties to discuss. One pertains to out of the base path, as Clemons called. The other pertains to obstruction regarding Lynch standing in Rocchio's way.
Official Baseball Rule 5.09(b)(1) states, "Any runner is out when they run more than three feet away from their base path to avoid being tagged unless their action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball. A runner’s base path is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight line from the runner to the base they are attempting to reach safely." This is the rule Clemons enforced in calling Rocchio out.
OBR 6.01(a)(10), which pertains to interference protection, however, states, "If two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball."
This rule is relevant because the non-protected fielder, which in this case was F1 Lynch (F3 Perez was protected), is liable for obstruction if they violate that rule, which states, "OBSTRUCTION is 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."
When there is a question of violation, whether it pertains to this obstruction rule, runner's lane interference, or any other rule, the benefit of the doubt goes to the team that has not violated.
In this case, we have a clear sequence of events. First, F3 Perez fields the baseball. Second, F1 Lynch who is not protected, stands in the runner's base path. Third, BR Rocchio runs to his left, more than three feet away, to avoid F3 Perez's tag.
Because of this order, it would appear Lynch's illegal positioning and obstruction came before the runner ran more than three feet away to avoid a tag. Had the pitcher not been in the runner's way, could the runner have remained within three feet of his base path? We will never know. There is a question of violation, which means the benefit of the doubt goes to the team that has not violated.
But because both teams violated, we must consider the order in which they violated. Because the defensive team Kansas City violated first, the benefit of the doubt goes to Cleveland batter-runner Rocchio, which suggests F1 Lynch obstructed the runner before the runner ran more than three feet away from his base path to avoid a tag. Because Type 1 Obstruction is an immediate dead ball, the play effectively stopped before the runner committed the base path violation; this is obstruction.
