What's the penalty for.....

[DG]

Originally Posted by NIump50

Fake tags aren't all that rare.
Issuing the warning can be a team or individual warning, your choice, because since it is unsportsmanlike conduct you are not obligated to issue a warning, you could if appropriate eject on the first occurrence.

Let's not mis-lead WooPigSooie. A fake tag is obstruction. Award bases as approprite. "After the end of playing action, the umpire shall issue a warning to the coach of the team involved and the next offender on that team shall be ejected." So it is a team warning, and the next offender on that team is ejected. There is no basis for ejection on the first offense. If you issue an "official" warning, to the coach, you must eject on the next offense by the same team.

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by DG

Let's not mis-lead WooPigSooie. A fake tag is obstruction. Award bases as approprite. "After the end of playing action, the umpire shall issue a warning to the coach of the team involved and the next offender on that team shall be ejected." So it is a team warning, and the next offender on that team is ejected. There is no basis for ejection on the first offense. If you issue an "official" warning, to the coach, you must eject on the next offense by the same team.

I think you're right. I stand corrected.

[RPatrino]

How does the FED obstruction penalty influence how you call obstruction?

In my opinion, the OBR method of allowing us to make a "judgment" call on whether to award bases, and the number of bases to award is much more fair then the FED penalty.

For example, during a JV game, BR collided with F3 who was standing on top of first base, and in his own words, "just minding my own business". I instinctively called "that's obstruction". After the play I awarded BR second base. If the game was played under OBR, he would have stayed at 1b.

My opinion is that we should call obstruction every time a fielder is in the way of a runner. The defense needs to learn to pay attention and stay out of the runner's way. If we don't call obstruction when we see it, the defense gains a great advantage.

I don't agree with the FED's penalty for obstruction.

Bob P.

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

How does the FED obstruction penalty influence how you call obstruction?

In my opinion, the OBR method of allowing us to make a "judgment" call on whether to award bases, and the number of bases to award is much more fair then the FED penalty.

For example, during a JV game, BR collided with F3 who was standing on top of first base, and in his own words, "just minding my own business". I instinctively called "that's obstruction". After the play I awarded BR second base. If the game was played under OBR, he would have stayed at 1b.

My opinion is that we should call obstruction every time a fielder is in the way of a runner. The defense needs to learn to pay attention and stay out of the runner's way. If we don't call obstruction when we see it, the defense gains a great advantage.

I don't agree with the FED's penalty for obstruction.

Bob P.

Fed allows us to make a judgement as to where the runners would have made it had their been no obstruction and award accordingly, minimum of one base.
What part don't you like?

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by NIump50

Fed allows us to make a judgement as to where the runners would have made it had their been no obstruction and award accordingly, minimum of one base.
What part don't you like?

NIump50,

If I'm reading him right, Bob P.'s objection is that the FED rule mandates a one base minimum award, even if the obstructed runner would NOT have obtained an advance base absent the obstruction.

JM

[Rich]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

NIump50,

If I'm reading him right, Bob P.'s objection is that the FED rule mandates a one base minimum award, even if the obstructed runner would NOT have obtained an advance base absent the obstruction.

JM

Personally, I like the minimum one base award. It's sufficient a penalty that perhaps the defense will think twice about committing obstruction again.

I don't lose a lot of sleep over FED rules -- they are what they are and I just go out and play umpire.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

I don't lose a lot of sleep over FED rules -- they are what they are and I just go out and play umpire.

Preach on, brutha Rich!

[BlueLawyer]

Once upon a time I read an article in Referee magazine breaking down the Fed/OBR rules differences based, essentially, on four factors: (1) economics (metal bats); (2) safety (force play slide rule- although I think there is reasonable disagreement on whether that works); (3) time (run rule- 7 innings); and (4) participation (re-entry rule). I am not convinced that the Fed obstruction rule works to further any of those goals. If there is unintentional but also non-malicious obstruction, the award should mirror the OBR rule- award according to the umpire's judgment. If the obstruction is malicious, ejection (also an available remedy in OBR) is plenty of added punishment.

There are other Fed rules I would rewrite if I were in charge. Unfortunately, nobody has asked me yet.

My .02.

Strikes and outs!

[WooPigSooie]

So, is it a mandatory one base award or judgement?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by WooPigSooie

So, is it a mandatory one base award or judgement?

If you call obstruction it is a one base award. It is up to the umpire whether they get more than that. So it is both a judgment call and a one base award.

Peace

[DG]

I call the obstruction and then wait to see what happens. Example, runner is obstructed going toward 3B while ball is in LF, I give the signal and wait to see what happens. The runner is thrown out by F7 at the plate on a close play. In my judgement he is awarded home because absent the obstruction going to 3B he would have been safe. If he was thrown out easily I have nothing, he runs at his own risk past the awarded base (3rd).

I don't like advancing a runner on a type B, when the runner would not have advanced, but that's the FED rule interpretation, although they don't recognize different types of obstruction.

There are several FED rules I don't like, but I call 'em, and I don't let the penalty cloud my thinking.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BlueLawyer

Once upon a time I read an article in Referee magazine breaking down the Fed/OBR rules differences based, essentially, on four factors: (1) economics (metal bats); (2) safety (force play slide rule- although I think there is reasonable disagreement on whether that works); (3) time (run rule- 7 innings); and (4) participation (re-entry rule).

There's also the reason of "umpire competence" -- and the obstruction rule fits this.