|
One ump's obstruction might not be obstruction in someone else's eye.
----------------------------------------------------
Coach here.
Jones comment is a key takeaway from this thread. I'm finding my former coaching brethen turned Blues are much more apt to call obstruction than the old school guys who started their profession under different guidelines.
Go back and look at the much discussed crash video. Why is the catcher so deep (behind the base path to begin with?) If she were in front of the basepath, would she possibly have been able to catch the throw on the fly and apply the tag a split second sooner? Straddling the base path without the ball gave her an advantage to force the runner into a wider path. Unfortunately for our catcher, the runner chose the direct line approach.
The Blues on this forum generally agree that potential obstruction occurred on the part of the catcher, but they saw no deviation in the runners path as a reaction to the obstruction. Through the magic of the pause button, I see a reaction on the part of the runner prior to the ball being possessed by the fielder. She is lowering her body into heat seaking missle mode and being prematurely forced to slide. The correct call should be obstruction, and MC.
My advice is do not teach your kids to block bases but DO teach them to look for contact with a defender without the ball. The inside corner belongs to the runner. Blues are not calling obstruction without contact. (See recent discussion regarding the non called obstruction in the CWS game)
Its tough enough to generate offense with the batters box to batters box sized strike zone, we need some rules interpretations leaning in the offenses direction.
|