I didn't write the baseball rule book

[chelsea0011]

The rules clearly state that a fielder shall obstruct a runner if he is no longer in the play and he is in the way of a runner advancing a base. Intentional or not intentional, it is obstruction. However, the rules chooses a hypothetical where a runner is laying on the ground. It clearly states that the fielder is "very likely" obstructing. This changes the rule above which states that it would be obstruction in all cases. The rule did not say that a fielder laying on the ground does not change the obstruction call but he "very likely" is obstructing. It is clear to me why the rules committee have a problem with the play where a fielder is put to the ground for whatever reason. There is a part of obstruction that is inadvertent. Obstruction is a fairness issue that isn't set in stone in all cases or the hypothetical would have been worded differently.

[randr]

1. A physical challenge to the question of intentional or unintentional obstruction

Lie on your stomach and attempt to get up.

[trumad]

2. or lift your legs in an attempt to trip the runner

Which he clearly did.

[frylock]

3. i just took your challenge..

lying on my stomach, I brought my hands down to chest level, put both palms flat on the ground, and simultaneously lifted my upper body while bringing my knees up to my chest. from that position, I used my hands to leverage my upper body, got my feet under me, and then stood up. not once did I need to bend my knees to raise my feet in order to pick myself up off the floor, let alone twice. obviously intentional, and a dick move as well.

[randr]

4. Same experience here

in fact I found it hard to raise my legs as in the play without effort.