MD90 DEPARTING SNA RECEIVES CONFUSING TAXI INSTRUCTIONS FROM ATC.

Narrative

CALLED FOR TAXI AT SAN WITH INFO. RECEIVED CLRNC 'TAXI RWY 27 FOLLOW 2ND ACR Y.' WE THEN RECEIVED AMENDED TAXI CLRNC 'ACFT X NOW FOLLOW ACR Z OUT OF TXWY B6;' WHICH WE ACKNOWLEDGED. AS WE APCHED TXWY B6; AN ACR Z JET EXITED THE RWY AT HIGH SPD AND CAPT XXXX SLOWED AND MANEUVERED AWAY FROM THE ACR Z JET. AFTER THE FACT WE DETERMINED THAT THE CTLR WANTED US TO GIVE WAY TO AN ACFT THAT HAD NOT EVEN LANDED YET. WE INFERRED THAT SHE WAS REFERRING TO AN OUTBOUND ACFT. ADDITIONALLY; AS WE PROCEEDED; WE WERE TOLD THAT WE DID NOT GIVE WAY TO ACR Y PUSHING OFF THE GATE. WE FOLLOWED THE 2ND ACR Y JET THAT WE SAW; AS PER HER CLRNC. WE CONCLUDED; AFTER THE FACT; THAT SHE WANTED US TO HOLD FOR AN ACR Y JET THAT HAD NOT YET PUSHED. WE SAW 2 ACR Y JETS; ONE X COLOR AND ONE Y COLOR TAXIING ALREADY. WE FOLLOWED THEM SO; IT APPEARS THAT WE WERE TO UNDERSTAND TO WAIT FOR AN ACFT THAT WAS STILL AIRBORNE AND ANOTHER THAT HAD NOT BEGUN TO TAXI. BOTH OF US DID NOT HAVE ANY REASON TO QUESTION THE CLRNC AND FEEL THAT WE COMPLIED WITH THE CLRNC AS WE UNDERSTOOD IT. THE CTLR MADE A LOT OF ASSUMPTIONS; AS DID WE. I GUESS NEXT TIME I WILL HAVE TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX AND LOOK FOR OTHER THAN THE OBVIOUS WHEN INTERPRETING ATC INSTRUCTIONS. IN THIS INSTANCE; I FEEL THAT IF THE CTLR WOULD HAVE POINTED OUT THAT THE ACFT SHE WAS REFERRING TO WAS ABOUT TO TOUCH DOWN; AND THE SECOND ACFT WAS ABOUT TO START A PUSHBACK; THE CONFUSION WOULD NEVER HAVE OCCURRED.