Obstruction on a Steal

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

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]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Umpmazza

Princess..

Princess? What's your problem? I didn't insult you - why do you feel the need to insult me?

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]

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]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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..