Blocking of the base question
 

I see this many times on pick-off attempts and want to make sure I'm thinking right about this.

I have been told, perhaps incorrectly, that the runner must be allowed access to the base when diving back into it. Many times the fielder will plant his foot along the inside of the base and the diving fielder has little base area to touch, many times ending up touching the fielder's foot, not the base on the throw. Should this be treated as obstruction? If so, would an extra base be given as a penalty or only allow the safety back to base he dives back to?

All 3 codes now basically state, if you do not have the ball, you may not block the base. So first, you must determine if the fielder is in possession (not receiving, but possession) of the ball.

If he has possession, then he can block access all he wants. If he does not, then in OBR & NCAA, you would award the runner the base that he was returning to. In FED, you would award the next base.

So a blocked pick-off at 1st without the ball:
OBR & NCAA the award is 1st base.
FED the award would be 2nd base.

I disagree.

In FED, F3 can block the base without the ball, he just can't block it completely.

8.3.2 Situation G

Please be aware that when we veterans refer to "blocking" the base, we are referring to the entire base, allowing no way in. If we want to refer to a "partial block", it is referred to in that manner. This way we are not constantly splitting hairs. I tell you this out of respect for your many posts (although I do not recall you on the Baseball section).

Regards

Think of "access" this way:
1. The runner must be able to reach the base. A quarter inch will not be enough, but it is possible to block part of the base and still allow access. Umpire judgment will be required.
2. The access allowed does NOT have to be the runner's "preferred" access: if the fielder allows access, and the runner ends up touching only shoe, I'm calling the out not OBS.

That is not correct.

In OBR, the fielder can block the base if the play is imminent. So, there's no obstruction and no award.

In NCAA, the award is the next base.

The FED part of the above is true if the fielder is "denying access" to the base, not mereely blocking the part the runner wants to go to. (Yes, it's a strange rule)

Yes, we must now read the runner's mind of what part of the base he wants. :rolleyes:

Also if obstruction were committed in this situation, the runner would be awarded second wouldn't he?

Thanks Ozzy. I certainly see your point on splitting hairs. It looks like Bob took it the same way I did. Either way, thanks for heads up.

If you have obstruction on F3 on a runner attempting to get back to first, you award the runner second base.

You've got it backwards. Blocking the part of the base where the runner wants to go is NOT obstruction, provided the fielder allows access to the base.

So, we do NOT need to read the runner's mind. We need to judge whether the fielder (completely, and without the ball) denied access to the base. If so, then OBS no matter where the runner was trying to go; if not, then no OBS, no matter where the runner was trying to go.