The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 13, 2007, 07:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,729
And

I do not believe it does . . . BUT I will wait for the final rule and interps to make my decision.

Regards,
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 13, 2007, 08:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 4,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim C
I do not believe it does . . . BUT I will wait for the final rule and interps to make my decision.

Regards,
I hope you are correct, Tim. But from my read, it will take a written exception to the new wording for FED to clarify that you are.
__________________
GB
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 13, 2007, 11:01pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: In a hut
Posts: 911
Send a message via AIM to fitump56 Send a message via MSN to fitump56 Send a message via Yahoo to fitump56 Send a message via Skype™ to fitump56
Originally Posted by fitump56
Originally Posted by TwoBits
The current softball FED rule considers denying a base without possession of the ball as obstruction, so my comments are assuming (yes, I know, assume) that this will be the model for FED baseball as well.

In FED softball, their are no more train wrecks. You either have:
a) Fielder has ball, runner contacts fielder for a tag out, interference, and/or malicious contact.
b) Fielder does not have ball, runner contacts fielder (unintenionally), obstruction on the fielder.




What if? Excellent question. What will be the standard for this discussion because no matter what you call, it isn't covered in the above.

I Googled around for discussions about these plays which fall between the cracks and for plays where it is impossible to tell if a person is safe or out. The one I found that I liked the most, and intend to adopt, is the concept of rewarding the better play.

In this case, the better play is R advancing since we have F with an error. Since the rule only has two options, and I now have decided to make the interp favor R, then we have OBS.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire
So the consensus is that a fielder who loses control of the ball during a tag will be guilty of obstruction?

That seems reasonable on a play where the runner is advancing (1 base award will put him where he would have been under the old rule) but unfair where the runner is returning (pick off at 2nd, F6 loses the ball on the tag, runner gets 3rd).
Unfair, possibly, but I would always lean to the Offense side on OBS with the onus on D to get out of the way. Under the concept of rewarding the better play, the better play is R not the F with an E. If they come up with some other interp, and I doubt they can unlesds they start getting video specific about OBS, then you have to have some mechanism to defend your position on theis new OBS rule.

Once again, the OBR and its variations, always have gaps, what are you going to use to decide how to handle those gaps? This new rule, I am sure it is well intentioned, opens more gaps.
__________________
"Never try to teach a pig to eat reasonably. It wastes your time and the pig will argue that he is fat because of genetics. While drinking a 2.675 six packs a day."
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 13, 2007, 11:11pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: In a hut
Posts: 911
Send a message via AIM to fitump56 Send a message via MSN to fitump56 Send a message via Yahoo to fitump56 Send a message via Skype™ to fitump56
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoBits
Very aware they are two different sports, but it seems as if FED is trying to bring them a little closer together. For example, I figured this new rule would be enforced similar to FED softball.
I agree with this. I don't know if it is by choice or chance or monosexual thesis, but the steel cleat ruling got me to really looking at FED softball just as you have. Slowly creeping, rule by rule, closer and closer to baseball.
__________________
"Never try to teach a pig to eat reasonably. It wastes your time and the pig will argue that he is fat because of genetics. While drinking a 2.675 six packs a day."
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 14, 2007, 12:25am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: SW Kansas
Posts: 728
According to David Wells, baseball players will be wearing skirts soon anyways. Coincidence?

Linky
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 15, 2007, 11:12pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarthB
I believe that a strict reading of the rule change eliminates this exception.
I hope they don't write a rule that says the catcher can't move up the line to try to catch an errant throw without being guilty of obstruction. I still see an occassional train wreck happening.

Now if he stands up the line before the ball is released he is presenting a target and a likely obstruction call is imminent.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 16, 2007, 12:31am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 226
i just DONT see how a fielder moving to catch a OFFLINE throw and contacts the RUNNER (same instant) can be called for OBSTRUCTION. thats a TRAINWRECK. says so on google or something!

how does NCAA call TRAINWRECKS? can a NCAA umpire here comment?
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 16, 2007, 07:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson
i just DONT see how a fielder moving to catch a OFFLINE throw and contacts the RUNNER (same instant) can be called for OBSTRUCTION. thats a TRAINWRECK. says so on google or something!

how does NCAA call TRAINWRECKS? can a NCAA umpire here comment?
Trainwreck, as noted before.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 16, 2007, 09:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 685
I Want to See the Case Book

Friends,

While the razor is usually the best way to go with things like this, I will withhold judgment on if this is a good thing until I see the Case Book. As so many others have said, OBS is a judgment call with guidelines, and a lot of FED coaches will read the rule, make their own judgment, and then start seeing OBS where there wasn't any before.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 16, 2007, 09:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson
i just DONT see how a fielder moving to catch a OFFLINE throw and contacts the RUNNER (same instant) can be called for OBSTRUCTION. thats a TRAINWRECK. says so on google or something!
Yes, trainwrecks happen in baseball, but it looks like Fed may make them OBS.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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
I guess it was my turn. Rich Basketball 18 Sun Jan 14, 2007 04:43pm
Softball v Baseball Umpiring Chess Ref Softball 15 Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:50am
Baseball vs Softball Umpiring Chess Ref Baseball 7 Tue Jan 04, 2005 10:29am
I guess they are going to do it. JRutledge Basketball 40 Sat Jun 19, 2004 01:11am
Let's Guess JugglingReferee Football 5 Fri Jan 05, 2001 01:26pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:06pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1