[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by WestMichiganBlue

Your first two sentences are correct, but you don’t say how you personally define “affect,” or “reaction” or “deviation.”

In your 3rd sentence you say that you have to see the effect of obstruction. You want the runner to sell you on the fact that she has been obstructed.

Your words, not mine.

In doing so, haven’t you transferred the onus for obstruction from the defender to the runner? IMO, ASA places the responsibility on the defender.

The book DOES NOT say that obstruction is the act of a runner who deviates from their intended path due the presence of a defender without the ball. What it does say is:


Obstruction definition is “the act of a defensive player” . . . . . who impedes.

Rule 5.3 states that “a fielder obstructs. . . . . . ./b]

RS #36 says that “obstruction is the act of a fielder. . . . . .

ASA February 2010 Plays and Clarifications: “a defensive player impeding or hindering the runner’s advancing or returning to a base by the action of blocking the base.


Finally – ASA casebook play 8.6.7: after a tag play collision, the ball gets away but the defender is on top of the runner, preventing her from advancing. The umpire calls obstruction and sends the runner to the next base even though the runner did not attempt to advance!

Per this play, it is the act of impeding rather than the visibly reaction of the runner that determined obstruction.

Since the 2004 rule change, ASA position has been that defenders should not be blocking a base, but that they should catch first, and then block. Nothing about “seeing” a runner deviate.

In the process of the play while you are trying to watch the ball and defender and runner, would you see the eyes of the runner open wide, or a slight twitch of the body as she makes a decision on how to react to the block in front of her?

[b]IMO, a blocking defender does not belong there, and the benefit of doubt should go to the runner, not the defender.


WMB

I have no idea what the **** you are talking about.