what i am saying is it would be type A obstruction. Obstruction on a runner having a play made on him. The ball would be dead and the runner would be awarded one base. That is how it would be with pro rules. Why is college different? Is college and FED rules the same thing?

Clint

Yes, NCAA is the same as FED on this. Obstruction is always a DDB. But I feel there was no play being made on the runner, since the ball was thrown away, and not fielded by F3. So, I would rule Type B in OBR as well.

Steve:

No two ways about it. Under OBR this is type A obstruction. The fact that the ball got away from F3 is irrelevant. They were playing on the obstructed runner.


Tim.

Well, I guess I just booted another one.

The play on the runner is the pick off of the runner. the fact that the ball gets away has nothing to do with there being a play made on the runner. When the ball leaves the pitchers hand that is when there is a play being made on the runner. so when the ball leaves the pitcher hand and then the obstruction happens you have type A dead ball R1 second base.

Clint

Well, I guess I just booted another one - Part 2.

But don't miss the point that we are discussing an NCAA play, so whatever the OBR ruling is is irrelevant.

NCAA and FED have no Type A in the book, so it's a DDB situation for all obstruction.

Steve,

Not so fast there!

In NCAA this would be "Type 2" (I guess) Obstruction. As you say, despite the fact that a play is being made on the obstructed runner at the time of Obstruction, the ball is "delayed dead" - just as in FED.

However, the fact that he is being played upon means he gets a MINIMUM one base award, even if he would not have obtained an advance base absent the Obstruction - just like in OBR.

Obstruction is one of those situations where FED, NCAA, & OBR each differ from one another in some respects.

In FED, whether the obstructed runner is being played upon has no bearing; it's always "delayed dead" and it's always a minimum one base award.

In NCAA, whether the obstructed runner is being played upon only has bearing on the minimum award - one base if he is(8.3.e(2)), no mimimum if he isn't(8.3.e(1)). The ball is always "delayed dead".

In OBR, whether the obstructed runner is being played upon impacts both when the ball becomes dead (if it ever does) and the minimum award. No play on the obstructed runner, it's "delayed dead" and no minimum award. If he is being played upon, it's "immediate" dead ball and minimum one base award to the obstructed runner.

JM

Correct, which still doesn't make my statement untrue.

Steve,

While I certainly agree with the CONCLUSION you asserted, I had a little issue with:

I would say that NCAA DOES have the concept of "Type A" Obstruction - which is treated slightly differently than OBR "Type A". I would agree that FED makes no discrimination in terms of OBR's Type A & Type B Obstruction distinction.

JM

Yeah, it's treated so differently that it does not result in an immediate dead ball, which is what makes Type A obstruction so unique. I would say that the NCAA has more closer to the concept of 2 distinct "Type B" style obstructions, than I would a "Type A". You have the "played on" and the "not played on" varieties, both of which are delayed dead ball. Do you see my point?

Steve,

Yes, I do.

It's interesting to me that I always found the most material difference (between OBR "Type A" & "Type B") to be the mandatory one base award in the former case with No mandatory award in the latter, rather than whether or not the play was immediately killed.

Personally, I never cared for the mandatory award in FED when the obstructed runner is NOT being played upon. This may just be because I learned the OBR rule(s) first.

The NCAA rule makes the most sense to me from a "proper balance of the game" perspective, but I also think it puts a much heavier burden on the umpire than either the OBR or FED rule does.

JMO.

JM

Yes, and I think PWL has just given an example of how the mandatory award isn't always possible or practical. I think it is a bad rule to. The OBR rules just seem to make more sense as far as obstruction.

PWL,

Good call. In the sitch you describe, the R1 "achieved" his award without benefit of the umpire's call. His "mandatory" award under FED rules is 2B, one base beyonf his "position" at the time he is obstructed - not one base beyond where he is at the end of continuous action. Since he already achieved it during the action of the play, it's a little superfluous to "declare" his award.

However, had he either decided to return to 1B OR been thrown out attempting to advance to 2B, the proper call under FED rules would have been to award him 2B, nonetheless. Even if he would not have obtained 2B absent the obstruction.

So, I think your "ruling" is correct in this sitch, but I'm not sure you're thinking about it the right way.

JM

PWL,

THAT is the crux of the matter. If YOU (as the umpire) deem he would have been safe at 3B absent the obstruction, the proper call (under ALL rule codes) is to award him 3B - even if, at the moment of obstruction, your initial judgement was that the obstructed runner was protect to 2B.

BTW, I usually read the rule books of the codes I coach under in March. Cover to cover. Every year. I continually re-read sections of the books as I see situations in the games I am coaching and as I read situations on these boards. I find that I continue to learn new things as I do. Even when I thought I already knew the rule

JM

P.S. If you continue to post in this fashion (i.e., intelligently and without rancor) I will be inclined to respond to your posts in like fashion. I would guess that others would as well. JMO