Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WestMichBlue
You guys are proving my point. What is deviation? My runner did not slow up, stop, go around, or execute a wide slide. She ran straight at home, and executed a normal slide straight into the plate. You've seen it a thousand times. Where is the deviation?
There are too many on this board (Mike and Cecil excluded) that have said that the onus is on the runner; you must see deviation. If the runner doesn't deviate - no OBS!
My position - which I have never deviated from - is that the act of blocking a base without the ball is in itself obstruction. The defender caused obstruction, whether we see it or not. You don't know what the runner might have done. Her action may appear entirely normal. But she has been forced to react by the actions of the defender. And that should be OBS.
WMB
|
Well, I didn't intend to be excluded, although usually in agreement with Mike. When I said
""apparent or assumed deviation". If the runner does not approach a base or plate in the manner I perceive the runner would have if no fielder were near, then the runner deviated"; I intended some
perceived deviation by the runner as a result of the fielder's presence. I agree with Tom's comment that "
impeding the progress of the runner without the ball is obstruction"
Isn't your description of "
the runner closes on F2, she must make a decision. She cannot keep running upright and crash into F2. She must either pull up, or go around, or slide. At that point, has she not been impeded? Even if a slide looks normal, isn’t that a possible deviation; a reaction to the catcher preventing her from running through the plate" a description of deviation?