Thread: Fed Obstruction
View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 14, 2008, 11:47am
UmpJM UmpJM is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

JJ,

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJ
I don't see a problem at all with this. The fielder must allow some direct access to the base if he does NOT have the ball. If I'm the umpire, I will look to see if the runner has to change his direct path to the base because the fielder WITHOUT THE BALL is blocking that part of the base. The NCAA has used this rule for two years with minimal problems. Sometimes we just have to umpire a little...
While I, personally, find your analysis appealing and logically sound, it appears to me to be at odds with FED Case Play 8.3.2L.

Collectively, the FED pronouncements on this change to the obstruction rule are severely lacking in clarity in regard to the intent of how they now want obstruction called. Which, I would guess, will lead to increased controversy this season over obstruction calls & non-calls.

JMO.

JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
Reply With Quote