The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 16, 2006, 10:15pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Hensley
What is the point of noting the runner has a better chance of avoiding the collision, unless you are suggesting that he had some obligation to do so?
I didn't point it out originally. I said, "as Garth has pointed out." Neither of us said anything about any obligation. We only presented the fact that is already in evidence, which is that the runner had a better chance of avoiding the collision. The fact that the runner was unable to avoid the fielder speaks volumes about the bang-bang nature of what happened. You need to read what I quote below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Hensley
In the play as given, when the collision occurred, the fielder was NOT "doing what he's supposed to be doing, which is catch the baseball..." He had already had his kiss at that pig, and it didn't work out. You have made no effort to explain the conflict between your interpretation of this play and the statement from the OBR I have previously quoted - "After a fielder has made an attempt to field a ball and missed, he can no longer be in the "act of fielding" the ball."

There is a key word in that statement, that also appears in the original description of the play - "after." My only point is there is rulebook support for a judgment of obstruction. You judge train wreck, fine. The original poster judged obstruction, and based on his description and the official rules and their interpretation, that's fine, too.
The original poster also just said to us:

Quote:
Originally Posted by DTQ
For all who asked, F3 leaped and came down before the collision, but did not have time to vacate the baseline.
(emphasis added)

Based on this, if you call obstruction, you would be incorrect. Your statement from OBR means that the fielder, after having attempted and failed catching the ball, must not now do anything to obstruct the runner. It does not mean that he has to suddenly disappear. If he then subsequently goes out of his way to impede the runner, then you have obstruction.

You keep debating this with me, as if I'm the only one saying this. Most posters have agreed that if F3 didn't have time after his leap to get out of the way, that it is not obstruction.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 17, 2006, 06:47am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 325
There's one other piece though, besides how quickly the F3 landed - did he have a shot at the ball in the first place? If it's three feet over his glove when he jumps he was not making a play on the ball. IF he never had a shot at (meaning he was never really making a play at it) it he can't jump, land, or do anything else in the baseline.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 17, 2006, 07:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by LakeErieUmp
There's one other piece though, besides how quickly the F3 landed - did he have a shot at the ball in the first place? If it's three feet over his glove when he jumps he was not making a play on the ball. IF he never had a shot at (meaning he was never really making a play at it) it he can't jump, land, or do anything else in the baseline.
Don't take the short end of the stick...unless its way, way over his head...then I'm ruling he was "making a play on the ball"...that is making an attempt to catch it.

Lord Byron: I pretty much agree with what your saying...there is a burden on the fielder to get out of the way...the only difference, as I read J/R, is the amount of time he has in order to get out of the way...on a batted ball he must get out of the way immediately after missing the ball ("disappear")...on a thrown ball he must get out of the way quickly, but not "immediately" (as J/R says, he need not immediately "disappear".)
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 17, 2006, 08:02am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve
Based on this, if you call obstruction, you would be incorrect.

You keep debating this with me, as if I'm the only one saying this.[/b]
You are the only one who appears to have the necessary omniscience to tell someone they are "wrong" on how they would rule on a judgement decision, when none of us were there to see everything that happened, exactly how and exactly when. I haven't once said a judgement of no obstruction is wrong; I have simply said that given the information provided by the original poster and the statement contained in the OBR definition of obstruction, a judgment of obstruction can be supported.
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 17, 2006, 11:45am
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Dave, read the post directly above yours from lawump. It pretty much says the same thing. DTQ stated that F3 had no time to move away to avoid a collision. That tells us everything we need to know, and to call obstruction in this case would be, say it with me now, WRONG. There is right and wrong on issues, and in this particular case, obstruction is the wrong call. My omniscience notwithstanding.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 17, 2006, 04:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 35
Send a message via Yahoo to Leecedar
What the heck... let me make things more confusing

FED case book 8.3.2 Situations C and I add a very interesting word to the case... they say that a fielder is allowed to be in the path if the play is "Imminent". Once the ball is past, there is no more imminence. Imminence refers to things in the future.

I still think whether he was making a play, whether he had a chance to avoid contact, etc... makes all of these kinds of things a HTBT, but I figured I'd stir the pot a bit.

Lee
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
obstruction jesmael Baseball 2 Sun Apr 17, 2005 09:21am
Obstruction whiskers_ump Softball 38 Fri Mar 11, 2005 07:26am
obstruction:asa/fed Little Jimmy Softball 10 Sat Feb 14, 2004 04:13pm
Obstruction? Gre144 Baseball 8 Sun Mar 02, 2003 09:12pm
More obstruction greymule Softball 10 Tue Jan 28, 2003 11:45pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:40pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1