Obstruction

[greymule]

Should obstruction ever simply be ignored because it would have had no bearing on the play? Example from a play I had: R1 on 1B, R2 on 2B, 2 outs. B3 hit a hard one-hopper that F5 backhanded near 3B. Just before F5 stepped on 3B for the inning-ending force out, R2, 70 feet from 3B, collided with and fell over F6, who was standing in the baseline.

I let the out stand and didn't get much squawking from the offense. I did caution fielders to stay out of the way of runners, though. Here's another one, from a few years later:

B1 hit a ball that spun off a corner of the plate and then rolled 15 feet up the 1B line, about a foot fair. B1 stood still and F2 walked up the line to get the ball, both players thinking the ball to be foul. I figured I shouldn't say, "Fair," but I did point fair with my arm. F1 came in to field the ball, while the (lazy) F2 started to walk back to his position. B1 still didn't move. Then the offensive coach yelled to B1 to run. As F1 was throwing the ball to 1B for the out, B1 collided with F2, who was now 6 feet up the line from home. Again I let the out stand, but the offensive coaches wanted to know why I hadn't called obstruction. I came up with the excuse that the batter started so late that the catcher figured he had abandoned his effort, etc.

And can obstruction be ignored in the following (not-so-rare) case?: R1 on 1B, B2 lines a single to left. F7 charges, takes the ball on one hop, and fires the ball to 3B. R1 rounds 2B and collides with F6 as F5 catches the throw. If you believe that R1 was not actually trying to run to 3B but was just rounding 2B, do you still call obstruction and send him to 3B?

Any opinions or related plays?

[Roger Greene]

Play #1 is a HTBT call. Was there an intentional act by F6 to trip or impede the runner? If so, then penalize the defense. Was the contact initiated by R2 in an attempt to draw an obstruction call? Can't allow that. Was the contact just carelessness and so close to the time of the put out that it had no effect on the play? Then a no call may be proper.

Play # 2, I've got obstruction on F2. Type A, BR to first.

Play #3, IMO to have an obstruction you need a couple of elements. A runner {1}must be making a legitimate attempt to advance toward a base(advancing or retreating), and{2} the defense must impede the runner's progress. A runner who has rounded a base and is just watching the defense field a ball, and who bumps a defensive player has probably not been obstructed if no play is being made on that runner, and the runner is not making a legitimate attempt to advance.

Others have disagreeed with me on this in the past.

Roger Greene

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by greymule

Obstruction is one if not the most difficult call in baseball even for the PRO Umpire. The question to be answerd by the the umpire is:

Did a Fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball , impede the progress of any runner. You can look up the OBR rule and various authoritative opinions to determine the meaning of what constitutues in the act of fielding a ball

Basically, it means does the Fielder need to occupy that space in order to field the ball. It does not mean that the Fielder can merely stand there or set-up there when the ball is in the outfield some-place.

In FED, at least in the association I belong to, the term in the act of fielding the ball means Is the ball directly on route or on a bounce to the Fielder.

Now I'll attempt to take your scenarios:

1. Should obstruction ever simply be ignored because it would have had no bearing on the play?

The answer is no. it's not our job to determine the bearing on a play. How do we actually know what coulda, woulda, shoulda happen. All we know at the time of the infraction is that someone is guilty of a rule violation.

We do however, take into account the merits of the play in making base awards, ie; was the ball bobbled in the outfield in which case we might protect a runner to an add'l base, etc.

If someone obstructs, we signal and call that's obstruction and depending upon the play it's either a delayed call (Type "B" BTW in FED always type 'B") or Immediate (Type "A")

If it's type "A" the runner gets at least a 1 base award, if it's type "B" we might give the runner a one base award or protect the runner back to his "retreat to" base. It's umpire judgement as to where to place runners under Type "B"

In FED, as mentioned always Type "B" and the obstructed runner is ALWAYS awarded a minimum of one base beyond his /her position on base when the obstruction occured (FED rule 8-3-2)

Example from a play I had: R1 on 1B, R2 on 2B, 2 outs. B3 hit a hard one-hopper that F5 backhanded near 3B. Just before F5 stepped on 3B for the inning-ending force out, R2, 70 feet from 3B, collided with and fell over F6, who was standing in the baseline.

I let the out stand and didn't get much squawking from the offense. I did caution fielders to stay out of the way of runners, though.

The question? did r2 make a "B" line for F6 as to "draw the Obstruction Call"? If that's the case that a good non call if however, F6 was lazy and standing in the base-path, then we have Obstruction and since there was a play on the obstructed runner, the Force out attempt by F5 we have Type "A" and the call is TIME You number 23 third base.

It's irrelevant that F5 would have recorded the out anyway. The issue is was R2 obstructed by F6? if you answer yes to that question then the defense is going to get penalized.

Here's another one, from a few years later:

B1 hit a ball that spun off a corner of the plate and then rolled 15 feet up the 1B line, about a foot fair. B1 stood still and F2 walked up the line to get the ball, both players thinking the ball to be foul.

I figured I shouldn't say, "Fair," but I did point fair with my arm. F1 came in to field the ball, while the (lazy) F2 started to walk back to his position. B1 still didn't move. Then the offensive coach yelled to B1 to run. As F1 was throwing the ball to 1B for the out, B1 collided with F2, who was now 6 feet up the line from home.

Again I let the out stand, but the offensive coaches wanted to know why I hadn't called obstruction. I came up with the excuse that the batter started so late that the catcher figured he had abandoned his effort, etc.

If F2 was blocking B1's path it's obstruction. F2 can walk back to his / her position without being in the base-path. Your reasoning "the batter started so late that the catcher figured he had abandoned his effort, etc." is not stated in the rules or authoritative opinions.

If someone obstructs and that is judgement, then call it. basically, if a Fielder is not in possession of the ball or in the act of making a play, they have no business being in the base-path of a runner. In addition, a runner can't make a "B' line at a Fielder simply to draw an obstruction call.


And can obstruction be ignored in the following (not-so-rare) case?: R1 on 1B, B2 lines a single to left. F7 charges, takes the ball on one hop, and fires the ball to 3B. R1 rounds 2B and collides with F6 as F5 catches the throw. If you believe that R1 was not actually trying to run to 3B but was just rounding 2B, do you still call obstruction and send him to 3B?

You have obstruction on this play Type "b", and it's judgement as to where to protect r1 to. If as you say you believe that R1 was not actually trying to advance to 3B then simply protect him / her back to second, conversely, if you feel that r1 made a legitimate attempt to advance to the next base, then award him / her that base. Judgement comes into play as to where to place the runners.

Pete Booth

[Bfair]

Based on your descriptions of the plays, I'd rule as follows:

Play 1---Type A obstruction. The fielder had the ball and was making a play on R2 when the obstruction occurred. Immediate dead ball, and R2 awarded 3B with BR getting 1B.

I'd need to be certain it was obstruction to call it, though. If I were in C position and had my back turned and did not see the contact occur, I would not rule obstruction on the "remnants" of the contact. A smart R2 may have veered into F6 trying to bait the call---knowing he'd likely be out at 3rd anyway. This call should most likely be made by PU who is looking at the play.

It's not obstruction until ruled obstruction, and if I'm PU seeing the play beat R2 that bad, then CSFP tells me it's very likely incidental contact vs. obstruction if I'm making the call. Either that, or type B (the contact occurred before F5 began making a play) and my "umpire judgment" tells me I protect him to the base I thought he'd safely obtain had obstruction not occurred---which is "none".......UNLESS further post obstruction evidence warrants it. In your actual play, the offense likely judged it the same way, and that's why you received little grief regarding your "out" call.

---

Play 2---Type A obstruction with BR awarded 1B due to obstructing the runner on a fair batted ball before runner reaches 1B.

---

Play 3---This is a much more difficult call.
NAPBL 4.22 (now the PBUC) states:

Official Rule 7.06(a) deals with cases when the runner is obstructed while a play is
being made on him [NAPBL emphasis]. Examples of this type of obstruction include:
1. Runner is obstructed during a rundown.
2. Runner is obstructed as a fielder is making a direct throw to a base in an attempt to retire that runner.
3. Batter-runner is obstructed before reaching first base on a ground ball to an infielder [NAPBL emphasis].
4. Any other example where a play is being made directly on the runner at the moment he is obstructed.

If you have judged the runner is not legitimately attempting to advance to 3B, how could the throw be an attempt to retire him?

In your play, if I judged there was no legitimate attempt to advance, then I would also judge this as Type B obstruction since no play was being made directly on him at the time of the obstruction, even if the ball were in the air toward 3B. Type B is umpire judgment, and I would protect the runner safely back to 2B, but not feel compelled to award the runner 3B---as you question.

If I judged he was legitimately attempting advance while obstructed and while being played upon, then I would kill the play and award him 3B even if I thought he had no reasonable chance of being safe at 3B. That's the penalty for Type A obstruction.

Here is a very similar play from J/R with their ruling:

R1, hit and run. The batter hits a line drive base hit at the left fielder. Rounding second, R1 must alter his stride to avoid the shortstop, and he stumbles- obstruction. The left fielder throws behind R1, who is now returning to second, and he is tagged: the return of R1 is protected. Indeed, the umpire must determine if he chose to return, or if the obstruction caused him to return when acquiring third was his intention, and was reasonably possible.

Note that in the J/R play the obstruction occurred before the play was being made on the runner returning to 2B. That causes the obstruction to be Type B---umpires judgment to nullify the act of obstruction.

Had the runner been obstructed while the play was being made to 2nd and during his return there, it would be Type A obstruction with the ball immediately becoming dead and R1 being awarded 3B (by rule-one base minimum).

Also note in J/R play that had the throw been behind the runner, but the umpire judged R1 as having legitimately advancing to 3B when obstructed and as having a reasonable chance of acquiring it, he could (and likely should) award 3B to R1.

With Type A obstruction you MUST award at least one base; with Type B obstruction, you use "umpire judgment" to nullify the act of obstruction---which typically means you protect him to the base he'd most likely obtain safely. There is nothing written in the rule that says you MUST protect him anywhere, although some other posters interpret those words into wording of the rule.


Just my opinion,

Freix

[Bfair]

Originally posted by PeteBooth:

If someone obstructs, we signal and call that's obstruction and depending upon the play it's either a delayed call (Type "B" BTW in FED always type 'B") or Immediate (Type "A")

[snip]

In FED, as mentioned always Type "B" and the obstructed runner is ALWAYS awarded a minimum of one base beyond his /her position on base when the obstruction occured (FED rule 8-3-2)

Pete, while you obviously understand Fed obstruction vs. OBR obstruction, I would not assume others do.

I think it is dangerous to say that Fed obstruction is alway Type B obstruction. It is not !!

While the Fed mechanic of obstruction may be the same as OBR Type B obstruction, the penalty is significantly different. As you later state, in Fed a minimum of one base must be awarded. That in fact, is the same as OBR Type A obstruction.

While you address the issue, you improperly state that Fed is same as Type B. It's much better for an umpire to learn and know the differences. Fed obstruction is neither Type A nor Type B---the mechanic and penalty in Fed result in a true mixture of both types of OBR obstruction.


Just my opinion,

Freix

[greymule]

Thanks for your thoughtful and intelligent answers, guys. I can see that there's some disagreement, but you were still a big help, because I get several incidents of obstruction a season. Interference, too, and not just at low levels of play.

When I played in school, American Legion, college, and semi-pro, I don't think I ever saw obstruction called, except a couple of times when the batter swung and hit the catcher's mitt. I also can't remember a single instance of interference. (Or a balk, either, for that matter.)

Maybe the players are not as well coached today. I get runners who insist they have some sort of "right to the baseline" that allows them to bowl over fielders in the act of fielding a batted ball. I get infielders who claim the right to be "around the bag" at any time, even if the ball is on the warning track and the runner trips over them. In a high school (Fed) baseball game last year, I had a play at home where the catcher caught the throw, then blocked the plate with his body and tagged out the sliding runner while preventing him from reaching the plate. The runner immediately jumped up and shouted indignantly, "He can't do that! He blocked me!"

[phillycheese]

I like the discussion the question generated, and I generally understand obstruction(don't ask me to take a test on it though! )
There are a few abbreviations you guys used that I don't know. Roger, you said "Play #1 is a HTBT call."
and Freix, you mentioned CSFP.
Help me out anyone,
Thanks
Phil

[Roger Greene]

HTBT = had to be there

CSFP = common sense and fair play

Roger Greene

[phillycheese]

Thanks Roger, wasn't sure if those were gonna turn out to be bulletin board abbr. or umpire lingo I hadn't heard before.