|
R2, stealing 3d on a sorta-passed ball;
F2 throws, poorly, F5 goes to his knees, one leg on either side of the base, and STILL drops the ball.
Meanwhile, R2 has slid into the fielders leg, & hasn't touched the bag.
F5 fishes around for the ball for a split second, gloves it, and tags R2's foot, which is hard up against F5's own leg.
Ruling on the scene:
when the fielder dropped the ball, his leg being in the way became obstruction, runner is protected into 3d.
Correct?
Wow, tough call against F5. Of course you had to be there, but as long as it was a "split second" and the ball did not get away from F5, no, I don't have obstruction. F5 took a legal position, then dropped the ball. He cannot be expected to disappear just becasue the ball is on the ground. If the ball rolled away or got passed him and he continued to block the base, absolutely, that's OBS. But a ball that is dropped within his reach and retrieved in a "split second", sounds to me like he was "in the act of fielding", which, in OBR, is the exception that allows him to block the base.
I thought that in MLB (an interpretation, not the book) there was something about blocking the bag being legal as long as the throw was "in the air over the infield." However, it does seem that such a rule would permit the catcher to block the plate long before the ball got there.
greymule: That is not an "Official Interpretation", but it is the rule of thumb used by many professional league umpires.
From the MLBUM:
If a fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and the ball is in flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder that he must occupy his position to receive the ball, he may be considered "in the act of fielding the ball". It is entirely up to the judgment of the umpire as to whether the fielder is "in the act of fielding the ball".
This is a standard used for PROFESSIONAL leagues. In Amatuer leagues, I don't give them nearly that much leeway. Depending on the level of play, the ball needs to be pretty much to the cutout (i.e., roughly 15') before I'm letting the catcher block the plate without the ball.
In LL and NCAA, technically, the catcher must be IN POSSESSION of the ball before blocking the base. I know at the discussion at the regional NCAA umpire's meeting last year, most veteran umps were saying that despite the change, if the ball was "close enough", they are still letting the catcher block the plate. They claim this is what the coaches want called, and that this is "just baseball".
|