Is this questionable?
 

F2 is 6 ft up the 3rd base line awaiting throw from F7 for a apparent play at plate. Runner comes down the line and with elbows high, knocks down F2 as the ball arrives. PU calls malicious contact on R and obstruction on F2 with resulting ejection and awarding a scored run. Is this really OBS? Didn't R have opportunity to go around F2 within the 3 ft restriction?

Within what "3 ft restriction?"

Under FED, malicious contact supercedes obstruction, so the run shuoldn't have been awarded.

NCAA allows both penalties to be enforced (even though they don't call it "malicious contact."

Under (pure) OBR, it wouldn't be obstruction since a play was imminent, and they don't really have a collision rule.

Did this actually happen? What level of ball?

-Josh

Jaksa/Roder considers the play offensive interference.

Mind explicitly listing which part of J/R considers this "offensive interference"?

From J/R: A runner has interfered with the flight of a thrown ball, a throw absent a batted ball, or a tag attempt only if such runner: 1) Commits an intentional action to interfere that disregards his try to get to a base safely and 2) Such action hinders a fielder trying to throw or trying to tag.

A runner must prove by his actions and the way he positions himself that his intent is to reach and stay on a base safely. Actions that disregard this intent and show, rather, an intent to interfere include...

It then lists examples of interference with a thrown ball and tag attempt.

I believe he was referring to this section of J/R:

Chapter 13: Offensive Interference

B. Thrown Ball

It is interference by a runner on a thrown ball only if such runner:
1. commits an intentional action to interfere that disregards his try to get to a base safely, and
2. such action hinders a fielder trying to throw or trying to tag.

NOTE: Interference on a thrown ball does not require contact. Note also that a runner is not exempt from interfering because he has touched or passed home. Such runner can still interfere and cause the out of another runner.

A runner must prove by his actions and the way he positions himself that his intent is to reach and stay on a base safely. Actions that disregard this intent, and show, rather, an intent to interfere include:
a. grabbing, tackling, or assaulting a fielder,
b. intentionally standing and blocking a fielder,
c. waving arms,
d. slapping a fielder's glove or mitt,
e. going beyond (over-running) second or third base in a try to hinder a fielder,
f. sliding more than a body's length from a base in a try to hinder a fielder,

e.g. R1, one out. The second baseman fields a grounder and tosses to second where the shortstop tags the bag and is about to throw to first when R1: grabs his shirt, or slides into him two body lengths away from second, or goes beyond the back edge of second and roll blocks him, or waves his arms but does not contact ball or fielder.

In each case, the runner has shown by his actions and positioning that his intent is not to reach and stay on second safely, but to interfere with the shortstop's try to throw.

Sounds like the runner in the OP was interferring with F2 trying to tag him. The runner was not trying to advance to home plate and his sole intent was to crash the catcher, who was in the process of fielding the throw. JMO.

CU6,

Sorry for stepping all over your post. I think I found what you had.

And, if I may, calling it "Offensive Interference" caused Dave to question CU6. It almost did the same to me but I have learned to simply correct people over the years.

In other sports, there is Defensive Interference and Offensive Interference.

In baseball, we refer to it as Obstruction (when the defense hinders a runner) and Interference (when the offense hinders a fielder).

Mixing up the terms will cause people to become confused and challenge you.

I didn't envision the play that way in my mind's eye, but I can see how that could be what happened.

Still, relativley few leagues play under "pure OBR" (most have some "don't crash the catcher" rule), and the OP hasn't been back, so we don't know what really happened, or what rules code was being used, so we don't know whether the umpires were correct.

Our modified OBR leagues use the NCAA collision rule at home and true OBR on 1b,2b,3b...under the NCAA collision rule, would we have OBS in this sitch?

The NCAA collision rule has nothing to do with whether there is obstruction -- only with how to deal with it if there is obstruction.

If you use the NCAA (or FED) obstruction rule, it's obstruction. If you use the OBR obstruction rule, it isn't.

okay, thanks for clarifying Bob. Basically NCAA OBS says that if there's no ball in the glove you have to allow access to home plate...is that accurate?

You envision the play differently than I do. The reason I asked for the cite from J/R is that I visualize the play as one which would get no call in a MLB game. And I think J/R supports that with the phrase: "......disregards his try to get to a base safely......". I think the runner was clearly trying to reach home plate.

It is a stretch to call this play a "tag attempt". A tag attempt requires the fielder to have the ball in his possession. In the OP, the ball arrives as R2 knocks down the catcher. Think of ARod slapping at the fielder on his way to first-- that's interference with a tag attempt.

ozzy6900, I don't think anyone here is confused by the phrase "offensive interference". It certainly didn't cause me to challenge canadaump6, who is after all only echoing J/R's terminology. In baseball, we have umpire interference, spectator interference, and catcher's interference. None of those are the responsibility of the offense.

There is a Defensive Interference. It's called "Catcher's Interference" in OBR.

Jaksa/Roder refers to Catcher's Interference as "Defensive Interference." This is how they separated their chapters.

They have chapters on Spectator and Authorized Person Interference, Umpire Interference, Offensive Interference, Defensive Interference, and Obstruction.

I guess they didn't get the memo that it was confusing, and they probably get challenged constantly.