Interference and obstruction calls are for the most part judgment calls. But there are guidelines that umpires must adhere to when executing these rules. A properly trained umpire should be able to reference the appropriate guidelines when ruling interference and obstruction. And coaches and managers on all levels should be prepared to argue the proper obstruction-Type 1 or Type 2.

In these first two plays, the umpires correctly ruled Type 2 obstruction by pointing and apparently yelling “That’s obstruction.” At the time of the obstruction, no play was being directly made on the runner. In both plays, the ball was properly kept alive, but the runner in these plays were incorrectly allowed to advance to the next base because both were easy outs, and the obstruction did not impact the outcome of the play.

Obstruction Play No. 1

In this High A South Atlantic League game, the Greensboro Grasshoppers (Pirates) hosted the Jersey Shore BlueClaws (Phillies). The Greensboro batter hit a shot that deflected off the BlueClaws’ second baseman. The ball rolled down the right field line where it was retrieved by the second baseman. The BlueClaws’ first baseman obstructed the batter-runner as he rounded first base and headed to second.

The first base umpire in this two-man umpiring team, appropriately pointed, and signaled Type 2 obstruction. The batter-runner was an easy out as he attempted
to reach second base. But the umpire allowed the batter-runner to remain at second base despite the fact that there was no automatic base award, and the obstruction did not impact the outcome of the play.

Ruleball Comments

• In my opinion the first base umpire properly signaled Type 2 obstruction by pointing to the obstruction and kept the ball alive.
• When Type 2 is called, there is no automatic base award, and the play is allowed to continue. If the runner is called out on a close play, the runner should be protected and allowed to remain at the base he has attempted to advance to.
• If the runner is an easy out, the obstructed runner should be called out despite the obstruction. From this corner, that should have been applied in this play.
• In the above play, it appears that the umpire correctly ruled Type 2 obstruction but treated the play as a Type 1 by allowing the Greensboro runner to remain at second base.
• When Type 1 is called, the umpire should raise both arms and give the “Time” signal. The award should be one base from the last base touched. But this play was a Type 2 with no automatic base award because there was no play being directly made on the runner at the point of obstruction.

Obstruction Play No. 2

In this play, the Grasshoppers were the home team and were on defense and the Winston Salem Dash (White Sox) were on offense. The Dash had runners on first and second when the Grasshoppers’ pitcher attempted to pick-off the runner on second. The ball sailed into center field. The runner
on second and the shortstop became entangled before the runner on second attempted to advance to third base.

The centerfielder recovered the ball and threw to the second baseman who ran at the runner and tagged the runner who was between second and third.
The field umpire inexplicably awarded the runner third base.

Ruleball Comments

• Again, it appeared that the field umpire initially pointed when the runner and the shortstop were entangled while the ball rolled into center field. This indicated that a Type 2 obstruction occurred because at the moment of the obstruction no play was being directly made on the runner.
• The ball was properly kept alive. The obstructed runner apparently thinking he was awarded third base, walked and jogged slowly toward third and was an easy out. But the umpire incorrectly awarded the runner third base.
• As in Play No. 1, it appears the umpire was confused between the execution of the two different types of obstruction.
• In my opinion, the runners in both plays should have been called out because the obstruction did not impact the outcome of either play. Neither runner deserved protection because they were both easy outs.
• The lesson here is that runners should continue to run full speed to the next base when they are in the middle of a Type 2 obstruction play. The base coaches should be alert to this. In the above two plays, the offensive team caught a break while the defensive team was deprived of an out.

Umps Misinterpret the Balk Rule

In back-to-back extended spring games, the umpires misinterpreted rule 6.02 (a) PENALTY that covers various situations when the batter is awarded first base following a pitch that is delivered after a balk. The rule reads, “The ball is dead, and each runner shall advance one base without liability to be put out, unless the batter reaches first on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, in which case the play proceeds without reference to the balk.”

On April 28, 2025 the rule was twice misinterpreted in the same game when Houston played at Washington and the following day a different set of umps misinterpreted the same rule when Washington and Miami played in Jupiter.

On both occasions Washington had a runner on first and a 3-0 count on the batter when a pitch that was called “Ball Four” followed a balk. In all three situations the umpires correctly awarded the runner second base because of the balk but incorrectly denied the batter the right to go to first base.

Because the “Ball Four” forced the runner on first to advance to second, the balk is nullified. Look at the Ball Four as a base hit. If there were runners on first and third, or second and third, or just second, or just third, the “Ball Four” would not force all runners to advance one base. In that case the balk rule would be enforced. The runners would each advance one base and the batter would remain in the batter’s box with the count he had prior to the pitch.

The batter is awarded first base only when a base-on-balls follows a balk and there is a runner on first, first and second, or first, second and third. In those situations, the base-on-balls FORCES all runners to advance one base including the batter. In other situations as outlined in the rule, if the batter-runner reaches base on a hit, an error, hit by pitch etc. and all runners advanced one base, the balk is nullified.

Umpires on all levels can get confused by this rule. The Blue Jays hosted the Mariners on April 30, 2023. In the bottom of the fourth, Whitt Merrifield was at bat with a 3-2 count and two outs facing Penn Murfee. Vlad Guerrero, the runner on first, took off with the pitch that was “Ball Four.” One of the umpires called a balk on Murfee because he did not come to a stop before delivering the pitch. Guerrero was allowed to stay at second because of the balk but lost his stolen base.
6
Merrifield incorrectly was not awarded first base and remained at bat with a 3-2 count. He subsequently struck out.

In the above play, because Merrifield would have reached first base via a base on balls, and this would have forced Guerrero to second base, the balk is nullified. If Guerrero was on second or third base at the start of play, the umpires should then enforce the balk penalty and keep Merrifield at bat because “Ball Four,” would not force Guerrero to the next base.

Rich Marazzi

Rules consultant/analyst: Angels, Dodgers, Mets, Nationals, Orioles, Padres, Phillies, Pirates, Red Sox, Rangers, Royals, Tigers, Twins, White Sox, Yankees, YES, and Chicago Sports Network