The Official Forum
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   Obstruction on a Steal (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/70598-obstruction-steal.html)

MD Longhorn Wed May 25, 2011 11:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives (Post 761160)
It's not a wrong answer in OBR and NCAA (who just changed their rule back to basically the OBR rule).

It may or may not be a wrong answer in LL as their interp says if a bad throw draws a fielder into the path it's not obstruction.

It may be in FED.
Laying on top of a runner AFTER the ball has gotten away is most definitely obstruction.

MrUmpire Wed May 25, 2011 12:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 761164)
From the NCAA Coordinators Call 3/1/11:

b. F2 moving a step or two up the line + immediate act of fielding a throw + collision = no obstruction but the base runner is still held accountable for a flagrant or malicious slide

c. F2 chasing an errant throw + collision = obstruction.

In the OP, F6 "leaps" for the ball. My guess is that it was more like play (b) than play (c).

Some received an email on that as well. Rule interpretations are dynamic things.

MikeStrybel Wed May 25, 2011 02:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 761164)
From the NCAA Coordinators Call 3/1/11:

b. F2 moving a step or two up the line + immediate act of fielding a throw + collision = no obstruction but the base runner is still held accountable for a flagrant or malicious slide

c. F2 chasing an errant throw + collision = obstruction.

In the OP, F6 "leaps" for the ball. My guess is that it was more like play (b) than play (c).
I responded to Spence changing the OP. The video I mentioned was shown at the NCAA Chicago meetings in January. I specifically remarked what type of play I was discussing in my post. It was not the OP.

I received the NCAA and CBUA rule interps, as well. Evolving plays make baseball rules discussion dynamic, to borrow a term. There is no need to keep stating what someone else did. Spence changed the play and the ruling I provided is exactly what the NCAA wants called.

Rich Ives Wed May 25, 2011 05:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder (Post 761175)
Laying on top of a runner AFTER the ball has gotten away is most definitely obstruction.
But that's not the situation and comment that led to my response.

Umpmazza Wed May 25, 2011 08:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives (Post 761160)
It's not a wrong answer in OBR and NCAA (who just changed their rule back to basically the OBR rule).

It may or may not be a wrong answer in LL as their interp says if a bad throw draws a fielder into the path it's not obstruction.

It may be in FED.
thanks Rich.

Umpmazza Wed May 25, 2011 08:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder (Post 761133)
Wrong answer, thank you for playing. Here's your Rice-A-Roni.
Maybe you should re read the NCAA again... thanks ..and just so you know I do like Rice-A-Roni

Here is the rule so you dont have to go look it up.. Princess..

A.R. 1 - If the fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and the ball is in flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the throw, he may be considered "in the act of fielding the ball." So it looks like this is what happen in the OP

A.R. 2 - When a fielder has made an attempt to field a batted or thrown ball, has missed and is in pursuit of the ball, he may no longer be considered "in the act" of fielding.

MikeStrybel Thu May 26, 2011 06:19am
A few of us had this discussion at the NCAA meetings in January. A person 'leaping to contain a thrown ball' is not occupying a position. He abandoned his position when he took to the air to catch an errant throw.

In the OP, the defensive miscue caused the fielder to end up on top of the runner. Penalizing those at fault would be the consideration. While this is HTBT, the description shows the runner sliding INTO the base when the fielder collides with him.

MD Longhorn Thu May 26, 2011 08:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umpmazza (Post 761347)
Princess..
Princess? What's your problem? I didn't insult you - why do you feel the need to insult me?

Quote:
A.R. 1 - If the fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and the ball is in flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the throw, he may be considered "in the act of fielding the ball." So it looks like this is what happen in the OP

A.R. 2 - When a fielder has made an attempt to field a batted or thrown ball, has missed and is in pursuit of the ball, he may no longer be considered "in the act" of fielding.
So, "F6 gets up to go after the ball and collides with the runner who is now up and attempting to go to 3rd." doesn't sound a little more like AR2 than AR1 to you? Sure does to me - hence the OBS ruling.

MD Longhorn Thu May 26, 2011 08:21am
Honestly, sounds like UmpM and Rich are refering solely to the OP and not to the additional information the OPer gave. Which may explain why they are calling nothing and I'm calling OBS.

Umpmazza Thu May 26, 2011 08:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder (Post 761463)
Princess? What's your problem? I didn't insult you - why do you feel the need to insult me?



So, "F6 gets up to go after the ball and collides with the runner who is now up and attempting to go to 3rd." doesn't sound a little more like AR2 than AR1 to you? Sure does to me - hence the OBS ruling.
well.. I was just getting back at you for the rice a roni comment.. I really didnt mean it in a bad way.. Im sorry.. was just having some fun..


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:20am.
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1