Strange obstruction play

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by jchamp

Do you have any clue where the idea that "it's a no-call" could come from?

There are "train wrecks" that occur -- where both the runner and the fielder are doing exactly what they're supposed to do -- and it's possible the OP was one. Without being there, I can't determine if F4 did OBS BR from 1B.

[rbmartin]

If F4 was in the act of fielding a throw, even an errant throw, no obstruction, just a train wreck. If, however, he was chasing down an errant throw which he has just missed when a collision occured, then he is guilty of obstruction. Judgement call, HTBT.

[UmpJM]

rbmartin,

The OP specified FED rules where being in the "act of fielding" does not absolve a fielder of his liability for obstruction as it does in OBR.

As described, under FED rules it's obstruction.

JM

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

rbmartin,

The OP specified FED rules where being in the "act of fielding" does not absolve a fielder of his liability for obstruction as it does in OBR.

As described, under FED rules it's obstruction.

JM

+1

The key phrase from the OP was that F4 "blocked the runner from reaching the bag." That can't be a train wreck in FED, but must be OBS.

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

rbmartin,

The OP specified FED rules where being in the "act of fielding" does not absolve a fielder of his liability for obstruction as it does in OBR.

As described, under FED rules it's obstruction.

JM

Thanks for the correction. One of these days I'll have to break down and study the FED book in addition to OBR

[DG]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

Thanks for the correction. One of these days I'll have to break down and study the FED book in addition to OBR

Don't do it, unless you have a real need.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

If F4 was in the act of fielding a throw, even an errant throw, no obstruction, just a train wreck. If, however, he was chasing down an errant throw which he has just missed when a collision occured, then he is guilty of obstruction. Judgement call, HTBT.

This response makes me sad. We're losing the battle of educating our own umpires about OBS - how the heck do we expect coaches to ever learn it?

[TwoBits]

But it does depend of the rule set, doesn't it? In FED, I have textbook obstruction. In OBR, I have (the non-textbook definition of) a train-wreck.

[jchamp]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

But it does depend of the rule set, doesn't it? In FED, I have textbook obstruction. In OBR, I have (the non-textbook definition of) a train-wreck.

That can explain why the coach emphatically told me that I "was dead wrong" and that it "is a no-call". With different rule sets, slight changes in the language will make a big difference in who is protected where. I thought I had a good grasp on Fed rules from reading the rules book, case book, and that book that NFHS sells with all the PlayPics. Still, nothing quite like this. Good confidence-builder to see it dissected and discussed. Thanks, everyone!

[UmpJM]

mbc,

Maybe RBM doesn't "do" FED games and has no particular reason to learn the FED rules.

JM

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

This response makes me sad. We're losing the battle of educating our own umpires about OBS - how the heck do we expect coaches to ever learn it?

As UmpJM surmised, I don't do Fed games. If you feel my response is incorrect under OBR, please educate me.

[MD Longhorn]

I apologize if that rubbed you the wrong way. Reading it now I can see how it might have seemed like a personal slam. You did, however, make your post as if it was the correct answer to the question without any mention that you don't do Fed but here's the OBR answer.

OBS can be a touchy subject with me as I work with umpires who just won't call it - and when I do coaches think I'm speaking chinese, even though their F3 is standing on the freaking bag 12 times a game as runners try to run around them.

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I apologize if that rubbed you the wrong way. Reading it now I can see how it might have seemed like a personal slam. You did, however, make your post as if it was the correct answer to the question without any mention that you don't do Fed but here's the OBR answer.

OBS can be a touchy subject with me as I work with umpires who just won't call it - and when I do coaches think I'm speaking chinese, even though their F3 is standing on the freaking bag 12 times a game as runners try to run around them.

No offense taken.

So is it your assesment that the OP under FED would be ruled obstruction but under OBR would be a HTBT?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

No offense taken.

So is it your assesment that the OP under FED would be ruled obstruction but under OBR would be a HTBT?

yes