Obstruction

[3appleshigh]

Originally Posted by Fritz

Speaking of obstruction, had this occur last night in a 14U game; no outs, R1 at 1B, batter hits a one-hopper to F4 who flips to F6 for the easy front end of the double play. R1 sees he is clearly out and peels off toward right field. F6 stumbles after crossing the bag, then bobbles the ball as he regains his balance and tries to throw to 1B (he clearly had possession at 2nd base, so the out stands). But his momentum has now carried him well toward right field several steps such that R1 is now in his path again for the throw to 1B. F6 double-pumps then throws late, safe at 1B on BR.

Coach wants BR called out for obstruction because R1 was in the way of the throw. We said no because R1 did as required and got out of the way and was only inadvertently back into the play because of F6's stumbles and bobbles.

Agree or did we boot it?

In no way shape or form was this obstruction, even if the runner had not peeled and cause a normal play to double pump could you ever have OBSTUCTION here.

[Forest Ump]

Originally Posted by Fritz
Speaking of obstruction, had this occur last night in a 14U game; no outs, R1 at 1B, batter hits a one-hopper to F4 who flips to F6 for the easy front end of the double play. R1 sees he is clearly out and peels off toward right field. F6 stumbles after crossing the bag, then bobbles the ball as he regains his balance and tries to throw to 1B (he clearly had possession at 2nd base, so the out stands). But his momentum has now carried him well toward right field several steps such that R1 is now in his path again for the throw to 1B. F6 double-pumps then throws late, safe at 1B on BR.

Coach wants BR called out for obstruction because R1 was in the way of the throw. We said no because R1 did as required and got out of the way and was only inadvertently back into the play because of F6's stumbles and bobbles.

Agree or did we boot it?

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

In no way shape or form was this obstruction, even if the runner had not peeled and cause a normal play to double pump could you ever have OBSTUCTION here.

You guys really meant to say interferance here, didn't ya.

Edited: You guys are fast on the post

[Fritz]

yeah, sorry guys, I of course meant interference (though the coach was calling it obstruction and I corrected him at the time, and then said it still didn't apply).

[jicecone]

In Fritz's post, why is the runner not out for interference?

He may have try to avoid contact, but he also "altered" the play to first.

?????????? Interference does not have to be intentional????????

[LMan]

Originally Posted by jicecone

?????????? Interference does not have to be intentional????????

INT has to be intentional with a thrown ball (in this case).

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE=jicecone]

He may have try to avoid contact, but he also "altered" the play to first.

It was F6 who caused his "own alteration" not R1. According to the OP r1 veered away from the play meaning at the time F6 touched the bag he had a "clean shot" to throw to first. He then stumbled etc.

Also, interference on a thrown ball requires intent as opposed to a batted ball which requires no intent.

Pete Booth