Little League Rules - OBS

[SpringtownHawk]

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?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by SpringtownHawk

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?

I didn't see the play you're describing. But the first question you have to ask is, "Was the runner hindered?" If he slid into the plate as you mentioned, probably not, unless he slid into the pitcher first and then got to the plate with a second effort.

The LL obstruction rule requires the fielder to be in possession of the ball when he/she blocks the runner's path. If the pitcher in the consolation game did not have the ball, then he could not get in the runner's way as the runner attempted to touch the plate.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by SpringtownHawk

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.

[MD Longhorn]

Yes, that was obstruction. His award - the plate, which he'd touched anyway.

[SpringtownHawk]

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.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by SpringtownHawk

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.

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by Manny A

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.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

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".

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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?

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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).

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by Manny A

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.

[Steve Meyer]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

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.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by Steve Meyer

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.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

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.