I guess we will all be umpiring softball next year
 

From NFHS.org:

INDIANAPOLIS, IN (July 9, 2007) -- Beginning with the 2008 high school baseball season, fielders without possession of the ball will not be allowed to deny access to the base that a runner is attempting to achieve.
This change in Rule 2-22-3 is one of numerous rules revisions approved by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Baseball Rules Committee at its annual meeting June 12-14 in Indianapolis. The rules changes subsequently were approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.
"This rules revision will be very beneficial because it will minimize the risk of injury for both offensive and defensive players," said Elliot Hopkins, NFHS director of educational services and liaison to the Baseball Rules Committee.

How is this different from OBS that we currently call?

I believe you will find that obstruction calls are much easier with this new ruling. It takes the fuzziness out of the call. Either you have it, or you don't.

The current rule contains the concept of "in the immediate act of making a play" and "when a play is imminent."

The new rule doesn't -- the fielder must have the ball.

Sounds to me like they are just giving the coaches more things to complain about. Personally, I didn't have any problem enforcing the rule the way it was.

Oh Well,
 

"Sounds to me like they are just giving the coaches more things to complain about."

I don't know how you can think this. In the most general of terms the NFHS has just tried to get their rule more closely associated to the NCAA rule.

This seems to be a rather nice change from my view. We no longer have to try to teach each umpire what "imminent" means and give guidelines.

Regards,

I hope you're right, Tim. For the most part, NFHS coaches around here have the hardest time with the rules changes that should be the easiest to understand. I do like the fact that NFHS is trying to get closer to NCAA.

This will be only a little difficult to teach at first. I believe we'll have to go over and over what constitutes a train wreck when an errant throw pulls a fielder into a runners basepath.


Tim.

As far as I am concerned, if the FED moves this way it will be a breath of fresh air!

Which is exactly what I have been saying all along.

A move closer to NCAA is good in most cases since NCAA is closer to OBR than FED is. It will be easy to adjust to this change for HS games, but in some cases make it more difficult. Will American Legion follow? Will tons of summer leagues who follow OBR follow? As long as there are differences there will be occassions to explain the rules to coaches who most of which don't know a single set of rules much less multiple sets.

I have had very few arguments regarding obstruction at the plate and no problems explaining imminent to the complaining manager. But ball in hand will be easier, I must admit.

With this new rule, won't "train wrecks" be eliminated?

No. (Well, not likely -- I haven't seen the final rule.) A throw that takes a fielder into the path of a runner will still be a train wreck.

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.

The model is the NCAA (baseball) obstruction rule.

What happens when the fielder loses control of the ball during the tag?

Given ordinary gravity, it falls to the ground.

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">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.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>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.

A throw that takes the fielder into the runner is NOT obstruction in NCAA BASEBALL or LL BASEBALL. Why would softball ever be considered a model for baseball - they are two very different sports.

Sports? :D

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. Another example: FED softball is allowing steel cleats next year just as baseball has for years.

But if this new rule is going to be interpretted as the NCAA rule is, then I really should rescind the title of this thread.

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).

I think the only time the NF tries to mirror other sports are in safety concerns. This is an NCAA rule or interpretation coming down to the NF. This has nothing to do with softball other than the fact that both sports are hybrids of each other.

Peace

well since as mr Fronhieser has said (if both players are DOING what they should be DOING) a throw Into a RUNNERS path is NOT OBSTRUCTION in NCAA for example- how can you rule OBSTRUCTION here??

there are STILL train wrecks with THIS rule. Thats MY opinion

That's not what he said. He said that a throw that carries a fielder into a runner's path is not obstruction. That doesn't include a good throw to a fielder standing in the runner's path.

If the fielder sets up in the runners basepath prior to the throw in order to field the ball to that spot I have obstruction if the runner's progress is impeded in any way. But as has already been said, if the fielder is pulled into the runners basepath as he attempts to field an errant throw I have a trainwreck.


Tim.

A throw that takes the fielder into the runner is NOT obstruction in NCAA BASEBALL or LL BASEBALL.

Or NCAA or Babe Ruth softball. (Don't know about LL.)

Not all that long ago, it wasn't OBS in ASA softball. I understand the interest in safety in ASA and Fed youth softball, but with this "either-or" stuff, they have created a very difficult situation for umpires.

In the uncountable baseball and softball games I played, OBS was purely a theoretical matter; it simply never happened in real life. Now it occurs seemingly in every game, and coaches want OBS called every time there's a tag play at a base.

Let's stop this canard now. The runner gets to choose his path to the base. If he is impeded and the fielder does not have the ball, that's garden variety OBS under the new rule.

Claiming that the runner had some other, unblocked route to the base is no grounds for disputing an OBS call.

MB has it nailed, IMHO. Anytime a runner is impeded by a fielder without the ball you have obstruction. No matter how much, or how little base is available to that runner, he decides his path to that base.

As far as this rule taking FED baseball closer to softball, I disagree. Thankfully, baseball has a long ways to go before it even begins to look like softball.

I believe that a strict reading of the rule change eliminates this exception.

And
 

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.

Originally Posted by fitump56
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">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.


</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

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.</I>

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. :(

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.

According to David Wells, baseball players will be wearing skirts soon anyways. Coincidence?:D

Linky

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.

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.

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.

Yes, trainwrecks happen in baseball, but it looks like Fed may make them OBS.