Obstruction on Catcher

[DG]

Originally Posted by Umpmazza

here is a idea....READ THE RULE BOOK

Please stop hollering. You remind me of some coaches I know.

[Umpmazza]

Originally Posted by BretMan

And an apostrophe that doesn't belong (knees)...but who's counting!

that's cool that there is errors in my sig, hell I only copied and pasted it.. Chit its not like I really care.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Spence

Nice contribution to the conversation though, Chief. However that IS just A opinion.

Doesn't you'se mean ARE just A opinion?

[FTVMartin]

As far as the Fed rule, it's not an interp. It was a rule change for 2008.
I've always been told the OBR interp for imminent play was the ball within a step and a reach of the player. Anyone have any source for that?

[DG]

Originally Posted by FTVMartin

I've always been told the OBR interp for imminent play was the ball within a step and a reach of the player. Anyone have any source for that?

"If a fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and if the ball is in flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the ball, he may be considered "in the act of fielding the ball". It is entirely up to the judgement of the umpire as to whether the fielder is in the act of fielding the a ball." This is pretty consistent, MLBUM, PBUC and JEA. From Carl's BRD we have this from a Fitzpatrick ruling in 01, "The definition of "act of fielding the ball" is purely umpire judgement , but the minor league guideline is the distance from the skin of the cutout at home to the plate, or about 13 feet on a properly designed field."

What is consistent is that your judgement rules.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by FTVMartin

As far as the Fed rule, it's not an interp. It was a rule change for 2008.
I've always been told the OBR interp for imminent play was the ball within a step and a reach of the player. Anyone have any source for that?

"Step and a reach" deals with a fielder still being protected after he mis-plays a batted ball.

[David B]

Originally Posted by jicecone

And this is the portion that makes this rule argumentative, instead of just saying with out possession of the ball, you can't be there, the umpire can always say there was some access to the base and the coach will for sure disagree. I am not 100% sure , but I think that the NCAA interpertation is, no ball possesion, you can't be there..

I agree it's pretty hard in FED to actually call this because it seems to me that nearly every time I see some access for the BR.

I had a play the other night where R3 slid into the F2 but there was a whole back of the plate that F2 had left open. I did not call it OBS, but the coach did ask me about it the next time he had a chance.

I considered it simply bad baserunning, but some one could have called it OBS just as well and gotten away with it by FED rules.

Thanks
David

[PeteBooth]

The OBR terminology is "in the act of fielding"

Imminent was the OLD FED term before the change as Bob eluded to.

OBR 2.0

OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and
not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner.
Rule 2.00 (Obstruction) Comment: If a fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and if the ball is in
flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the ball he
may be considered “in the act of fielding a ball.”

Pete Booth