The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 27, 2012, 07:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpringtownHawk View Post
In yesterday's Consolation Championship Game at the LL World Series, a play developed at the plate. The runner slid into the plate with the pitcher covering home and not in possession of the ball and not about to receive the ball. Not having called baseball for years, isn't that obstruction?
Not quite sure where your going with this however, from your description it sounds like the runner was safe because the pitcher never had the ball. Therefor, technically there may have been obstruction but, it had no bearing on the result and therefore wouldn't come into play.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 27, 2012, 08:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Yes, that was obstruction. His award - the plate, which he'd touched anyway.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 28, 2012, 06:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Spring, TX
Posts: 18
Runner slid toward the plate and was blocked by the pitcher's foot from reaching home plate, then after fumbling around the runner finally touched the plate before the ball got to the pitcher's glove. The PU didn't signal OBS so I didn't know how the rule was structured, in possession of or about to receive? Nevertheless, I had OBS.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 28, 2012, 08:20am
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpringtownHawk View Post
Runner slid toward the plate and was blocked by the pitcher's foot from reaching home plate, then after fumbling around the runner finally touched the plate before the ball got to the pitcher's glove. The PU didn't signal OBS so I didn't know how the rule was structured, in possession of or about to receive? Nevertheless, I had OBS.
Well, if THAT'S what happened, it is clearly obstruction in LL. In fact, only in pro ball would that not be obstruction if the pitcher is considered in the act of receiving the throw. In LL, the pitcher has to have possession of the ball to block the sliding runner.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 28, 2012, 02:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A View Post
Well, if THAT'S what happened, it is clearly obstruction in LL. In fact, only in pro ball would that not be obstruction if the pitcher is considered in the act of receiving the throw. In LL, the pitcher has to have possession of the ball to block the sliding runner.
In Cal Ripken/Babe Ruth ball it would not have been obstruction either (as long as the throw was in flight). They use OBR as well.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 28, 2012, 02:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbmartin View Post
In Cal Ripken/Babe Ruth ball it would not have been obstruction either (as long as the throw was in flight). They use OBR as well.
Actually, in OBR (other than the major leagues), "About to receive" is generally taught as "the ball is closer than the runner".
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 28, 2012, 03:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Actually, in OBR (other than the major leagues), "About to receive" is generally taught as "the ball is closer than the runner".
Correct, I should have been more precise. The rule reads the same for both but we generally enforce it differently at lower levels. In the play described above, if the throw just left the fielders hand, i've got obstruction. If F2's recieving the ball is imminent, I've got nothing in OBR (obstruction in FED).
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 28, 2012, 04:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Actually, in OBR (other than the major leagues), "About to receive" is generally taught as "the ball is closer than the runner".
That's not what I was taught: it means that the ball is over the infield. The ball moves a LOT faster than the runner.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 28, 2012, 03:04pm
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Yes, that was obstruction. His award - the plate, which he'd touched anyway.
This brings up an interesting side discussion. Since this would have been Type A obstruction if the ball was in-flight to the pitcher, what would you have done if there were other base runners? Would you have ignored the obstruction (and therefore not call Time) since the runner got to and touched home before the pitcher received the ball? Or would you have gone ahead and called Time to make the announcement?
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 28, 2012, 06:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Bend, In.
Posts: 2,192
Send a message via AIM to BigUmp56 Send a message via Yahoo to BigUmp56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A View Post
This brings up an interesting side discussion. Since this would have been Type A obstruction if the ball was in-flight to the pitcher, what would you have done if there were other base runners? Would you have ignored the obstruction (and therefore not call Time) since the runner got to and touched home before the pitcher received the ball? Or would you have gone ahead and called Time to make the announcement?
I think you have to call "time" on the type A obstruction here, Manny. If the runner is still scrambling to touch the plate when you recognize the OBS, you're going to set yourself up for a shart storm if F1 manages to lay a tag on him before he touches the plate. Think about what might happen if the runner didn't touch the plate. Lets say he missed it. Now the defense appeals the miss and you're going to have to go backwards and now call the OBS. Kind of ugly. This is a play where I'm going to make the call and place other runners.


Tim.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 29, 2012, 02:11am
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigUmp56 View Post
I think you have to call "time" on the type A obstruction here, Manny. If the runner is still scrambling to touch the plate when you recognize the OBS, you're going to set yourself up for a shart storm if F1 manages to lay a tag on him before he touches the plate. Think about what might happen if the runner didn't touch the plate. Lets say he missed it. Now the defense appeals the miss and you're going to have to go backwards and now call the OBS. Kind of ugly. This is a play where I'm going to make the call and place other runners.


Tim.
Great call there, but with obstruction the runner is awarded home, so why would there be an appeal of a missed base.

Stevie M.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 29, 2012, 02:25am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Bend, In.
Posts: 2,192
Send a message via AIM to BigUmp56 Send a message via Yahoo to BigUmp56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Meyer View Post
Great call there, but with obstruction the runner is awarded home, so why would there be an appeal of a missed base.

Stevie M.
Because he was asking about NOT calling the obstruction. And if you don't call it when it happens, then a missed base appeal is a possibility that you're going to have to explain away if you have to retroactively call it. It helps if you read all of the posts in the thread before you "jump" in and post under this new alias.


Tim.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 29, 2012, 06:56am
CT1 CT1 is offline
Official & ***** Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigUmp56 View Post
Because he was asking about NOT calling the obstruction. And if you don't call it when it happens, then a missed base appeal is a possibility that you're going to have to explain away if you have to retroactively call it. It helps if you read all of the posts in the thread before you "jump" in and post under this new alias.


Tim.
Busted.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 29, 2012, 09:42am
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigUmp56 View Post
Because he was asking about NOT calling the obstruction. And if you don't call it when it happens, then a missed base appeal is a possibility that you're going to have to explain away if you have to retroactively call it. It helps if you read all of the posts in the thread before you "jump" in and post under this new alias.


Tim.
I did read it. Your post started the thread in a whole different direction.

Another question was posed about ignoring the obstruction if the runner touched home, and keeping the ball live. How is a missed base appeal a possibility, when he was denied the plate to begin with? Never heard of this happening under any set of rules. I think you're taking the situation a bit too far.

I not waiting to call obstruction. I call it when it happens. It sounds like you would have the offensive team put in a substitute/pinch runner to complete the last half foot of the award if the runner was hurt, and couldn't finish his base award.

Sometimes you just have to umpire, and not overthink the rules. If not you can always go to instant replay. After all this is LL.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 29, 2012, 07:17am
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigUmp56 View Post
I think you have to call "time" on the type A obstruction here, Manny. If the runner is still scrambling to touch the plate when you recognize the OBS, you're going to set yourself up for a shart storm if F1 manages to lay a tag on him before he touches the plate. Think about what might happen if the runner didn't touch the plate. Lets say he missed it. Now the defense appeals the miss and you're going to have to go backwards and now call the OBS. Kind of ugly. This is a play where I'm going to make the call and place other runners.
Don't get me wrong, Tim. If I see the Type A OBS, I'll kill play and call it. I just got the impression from Mike's post that if the OBS happens at home but the runner manages to touch home before being tagged, he wouldn't bother acknowledging the violation.

So here's a potential FUBAR should that happen: R1 and R3, passed ball. R3 is obstructed by F1 before F1 receives the throw from F2, but adjusts and touches home just before F1 catches the ball. F1, after placing a late tag on R3, looks up and sees R1 take too wide a turn at second base. He throws to F4 covering second, and the ball gets by, allowing R1 to reach third safely.

The defensive manager comes out, and asks the PU, "Didn't my pitcher obstruct the runner before he scored?" If the PU says anything other than, "Nope," we might have a problem. An answer of, "Yes, and his award would have been home plate, which he touched anyway," would cause that shart storm.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
obs


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
League Rules (aka Calvinball) MD Longhorn Softball 6 Thu Oct 07, 2010 08:43am
Little League Rules w_sohl Baseball 2 Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:17am
Little League Jr rules? Age 13-14 jwwashburn Baseball 9 Fri Jul 07, 2006 01:13pm
little league rules jknight1 General / Off-Topic 2 Fri Apr 28, 2006 01:13pm
Cal Ripken Little league Rules? Dougaa Baseball 2 Fri May 24, 2002 08:10pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:54am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1