[David B]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth]

I disagree with the aformentioned.

There is no such animal as "accidental" OBS. We either have OBS or we do not and I agree that's umpire judgement.

Also, you do not need INTENT to call OBS. Intent is not part of the defintion.

Simple example:

B1 hits one in the gap. F3 is "sleeping" and not where he is supposed to be. B1 rounds first base and trys for second but because F3 is sleeping he obstucts B1.

Even though F3 did not mean to obstruct he in fact obstructed the runner and we call the infraction.

In Summary, OBS is not about intent it is DEFINED and penalized accordingly.

I agree in this thread it is not Obstruction but not because of INTENT. It's not OBS because F2 did not block the path to the runner on the ORIGINAL slide attempt. The ball was dislodged (legally), runner trying to touch the plate, F2 trying to retrieve ball and tag runner etc. is called baseball.

Pete Booth

Pete,

You are absolutely right, there is nothing in the definition about intent, but in my experience (I guess since I don't do small ball), there is a reason why the fielder is there.

I know I played F3 and we were taught to obstruct the runner (legally of course)

But you are correct, there can be plays like the new regulations regarding the throw to F3 where he is simply doing his job and NOW it can be called obstruction.

I should have thought more quickly before answering the question.

Thanks for helping keep my mind focused.

thanks
David