Quote:
Originally posted by Rich Ives
So why does the actual rule comment state "'right of way' is not a license to, for example, INTENTIONALLY trip a runner . ." ????
Remember, the runners heel hit the glove, not the glove hit the runner's heel. The runner tripped himself, the catcher didn't trip the runner.
|
OBSTRUCTION doesn't normally require umpires to consider the INTENT of the fielder when the runner is impeded. All that matters is that the runner WAS impeded.
The Casebook Comment to which you refer is a general statement that deliberate acts by the fielder will NEVER be considered part of any so-called "train wreck" situation ANYWHERE on the base path. It deals with the fact that this is a rule about INTERFERENCE not OBSTRUCTION. What it says is that while any fielder (including the catcher) certainly has the "right of way" to field a batted or thrown ball, that is NOT to be viewed as a licence to deliberately impede the runner, for example by intentionally tripping him. Protection from interference does NOT include the right to deliberately obstruct the runner.
OTOH, the Evans Professional Ruling is an explanation of a specific circumstance in which you MUST call OBSTRUCTION; namely if the catcher trips the batter-runner from behind.
Normally ANY contact between the catcher and the batter-runner around the plate area is NOTHING. If, however, the batter-runner collides with the catcher and accidentally trips him from behind in the process, that's INTERFERENCE. The reverse situation simply maintains the balance between offense and defense. This case has been made a specific exception because the offense would be too severely disadvantaged, regardless of the catcher's intent.
(a) Any fielder including the catcher cannot INTENTIONALLY trip a runner, even when protected and fielding in the
base path either AHEAD OF OR BEHIND the runner, but
(b) the catcher specifically cannot trip the batter-runner from BEHIND while fielding a batted ball in the
plate area and toward 1st base, whether INTENTIONALLY OR OTHERWISE.
Remember, both the catcher and the batter-runner are
required by rule to be in the plate area at the same time. That is a unique situation on the base paths, such that any contact is
normally treated as neither obstruction nor interference. However, any such contact by a runner elsewhere on the base path would
automatically be considered INTERFERENCE under OBR 7.09(L)
unless the trip was adjudged to be a deliberate act of the fielder. So, if this accidental trip happens elsewhere on the base paths, it's INTERFERENCE! If it happens around home plate toward 1st base, and the fielder involved is the catcher, that's OBSTRUCTION.
Cheers,
[Edited by Warren Willson on Mar 13th, 2001 at 04:42 PM]