|
Appreciate your response, Carl. My first post indicates if the throw takes the fielder into runner or if the throw is low and the fielder elects to react and position himself to block the throw I then have no problem. It is obviously not obstruction if he first receives the ball before contact.
The plays I am trying to discuss, and which seldom are called, are the obstructions where the fielder fails to vacate a preset position of blocking a base, drops to block a base at the last second, or where he steps into the runners path WHEN IT IS UNNECESSARY to go there to make the play. In fact, it frequently makes his catch MORE DIFFICULT because HE IS REACHING ELSEWHERE TO CATCH THE THROW. I agree these are likely coached maneuvers, but that doesn't make them legal. IMO they are not in the intent of the rule or the fairness of the game. If simultaneous contact occurs (ball to glove while runner is contacting fielder) at the point of the tag, I do not have obstruction. However, if simultaneuos contact occurs which then requires the fielder to move the glove to make the tag, then I have obstruction. It is the fielder's act of obstruction that allows him to tag the runner before he gets to the base. Any doubt in my mind regarding simultaneous contact, when not at the point of the tag, will not go in the favor of the fielder obstructing the runner off the bag !!!
In practice, I will admit that if the runner that is POSSIBLY being obstructed is able to get in safely I typically will provide a fielder a warning that "he is very close to obstructing the runner". If the fielder has successfully but illegally blocked the runner off the base, I don't have that option. I was taught at the state level, have in print from their training materials, and agree with their philosophy that a potentially offending player should never get the benefit of the doubt. The player knows he is stretching the limits of obstruction and should not be surprised if it is called, although I don't expect him to like it or agree with it.
|