Slide or avoid Contact

[PeteBooth]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Of the possible rulings on this play, ruling the runner out seems to be the incorrect one. Going by your post, if the catcher did not have the ball and positioned himself in the path of the runner this should have been called obstruction, if anything.

From the thread

the catcher jumps up the line into the runner to catch the throw coming in.

The aforementioned is not OBS. F2 hast he right to field a thrown ball. If the ball takes him/her into the path of the runner then so be it just like an over-throw to first base.

For some strange reason, whenever there is a collision in baseball, most think that something has to be called.

For the most part whenever you have close plays at the plate there will be contact and not all contact is malicious. From the strict wording of the thread unless one of the particpants did "something extra" I have nothing.

Pete Booth

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

From the thread

the catcher jumps up the line into the runner to catch the throw coming in.

The aforementioned is not OBS. F2 hast he right to field a thrown ball. If the ball takes him/her into the path of the runner then so be it just like an over-throw to first base.

For some strange reason, whenever there is a collision in baseball, most think that something has to be called.

For the most part whenever you have close plays at the plate there will be contact and not all contact is malicious. From the strict wording of the thread unless one of the particpants did "something extra" I have nothing.

Pete Booth

Maybe I could have clearer, but I did say 'obstruction, if anything.' If there's no intent for anything malicious on either part I'm more inclined to call nothing and play on.

[TussAgee11]

The catcher, in FED, has the right to field the ball "when a play is immenant", correct?

Thanks.

[Chukinrox]

Any player has the right to make a play on the a throw or batted ball when a play is imminant. You can't tell afielder that they have to let a ground ball go through the infield because a baserunner was running in the baseline at the same time the ball was there.

[DG]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

The catcher, in FED, has the right to field the ball "when a play is immenant", correct?

Thanks.

Any catcher, under any rules, has the right to catch a ball where it is thrown.

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by DG

Any catcher, under any rules, has the right to catch a ball where it is thrown.

I don't believe this to be true... under NCAA codes, even if the fielder is "in the act of fielding the ball", he is guilty of obstruction if "while not in posession of the ball, (he) impedes the progress of any runner."

(NCAA Rule 2)

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

I don't believe this to be true... under NCAA codes, even if the fielder is "in the act of fielding the ball", he is guilty of obstruction if "while not in posession of the ball, (he) impedes the progress of any runner."

(NCAA Rule 2)

LL now has the rule (similar to NCAA, ASA and Fed Softball) that the fielder must HAVE the ball to block the base(path).

This, of course, is referring to a thrown ball. Someone above mentioned a SS fielding a grounder-that is a whole other bucket of slugs altogether.

Joe

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

I don't believe this to be true... under NCAA codes, even if the fielder is "in the act of fielding the ball", he is guilty of obstruction if "while not in posession of the ball, (he) impedes the progress of any runner."

(NCAA Rule 2)

Official Interpretation from Dave Yeast: While a fielder may not block the base without the ball, a fielder may move into the path of a runner if he must do so to make a play, i.e., glove a throw. (San Diego MTG, Jan. 4/5, 2003)

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Official Interpretation from Dave Yeast: While a fielder may not block the base without the ball, a fielder may move into the path of a runner if he must do so to make a play, i.e., glove a throw. (San Diego MTG, Jan. 4/5, 2003)

Hmmm.... I stand corrected. I hadn't heard of this interpretation. Thanks for setting me straight.

[DG]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

I don't believe this to be true... under NCAA codes, even if the fielder is "in the act of fielding the ball", he is guilty of obstruction if "while not in posession of the ball, (he) impedes the progress of any runner."

(NCAA Rule 2)

In NCAA a catcher can not block the plate without the ball, but that assumes he sets up at the plate with purpose to block the plate. But in any game by any rules if he goes up the line to catch a wide throw he is not blocking the plate, he is fielding his position. If a train wreck happens, it happens. What you want the catcher to do, stand at the pate and say to himelf "I can't go after that wide throw, it might be considered obstruction"?

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by DG

But in any game by any rules if he goes up the line to catch a wide throw he is not blocking the plate, he is fielding his position. If a train wreck happens, it happens. What you want the catcher to do, stand at the pate and say to himelf "I can't go after that wide throw, it might be considered obstruction"?

I know of no such ruling for Little League Baseball for such an allowance. (In Fed and ASA Softball there is no such allowance.) You cannot block without the ball period.

Joe