obs
 

I know a still shot sometimes don't show everything bur just based on what you see what is your call?

I have OBS here but have some that disagree

http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/a...psmvknipq0.jpg

http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/a...pst2ulxw3a.jpg

http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/a...psxrdm03b8.jpg

Nothing....yet

Can you giver some input on why you have nothing yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I am speaking NFHS


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not speaking for Mike, but I don't see the runner either impeded nor hindered to this point in the pictures. No evidence she altered her path, she is sliding straight in (as if that is her intended path), and there is no contact with the defender at this point.

I would need to see either 1) contact before the ball is possessed by the fielder, or 2) indication she slowed down or altered her path because the fielder was in her intended path. I see neither (at this point or with those pictures).

The position of the fielder in her path is not obstruction by itself without the runner being hindered or impeded in some way.

2-36
Obstruction is the act of the defensive team member that hinders or impedes a
batter's attempt to make contact with a pitched ball or that impedes the progress of a runner or batter-runner who is legally running bases, unless the fielder is in possession of the ball or is making the initial play on

unless the fielder is in possession of the ball-- this fielder is not in possession of the ball and is in the runners path hindering her path to the base......

casebook:

8.4.3 SITUATION D: F2, without the ball is blocking home plate. R1 pushes F2,
but not flagrantly, out of the base path and touches home plate. RULING: The
umpire would call obstruction and signal a delayed dead ball. Since the runner
reached home safely there would be no award given. (2-36)

above case book is at home but I would think it stands for any base ?????

here is the last picture

http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/a...pslnxpzqgi.jpg

NFHS slide from earlier years...............

If the fielder’s location limits the
runner’s access to the base or path
AND the fielder does NOT yet have
the ball – OBSTRUCTION

The defensive player just being there is not necessarily obstruction, you also have to have a physical impedement of the runner. In the initial set of photos you posted there is nothing to indicate the runner slowed or altered their path to the base. In the last photo it does appear the ball is about to come out of the glove. If it did come out and the runner had not yet reached the base, then you have obstruction.

^^^ This and I don't believe this being NFHS is relevant.

Looks like an early slide to me.

Caused by the textbook obstruction.

There does NOT have to be physical contact to cause Obstruction.

MTD, Sr.

Of course not. Impediment is not a synonym for contact.

What I was trying to convey the fact that physical contact is not required for obstruction to occur while the poster I was quoting was saying that physical contact has to occur for there to be obstruction. I guess I could have worded my thoughts better.

MTD, Sr.

Where did I say anything about there having to be contact? Physically impeded does not mean contact.

Only if no possession.

Correct - As in Pic 1, Pic 2, and Pic 3

No one has indicated there does

Admitting that the angle sucks... I believe I have OBS because the runner slid way way too early - and that slide was her altering her path because the fielder was between her and the base without possession of the ball.

That said, if the slide was not early (in the umpire's judgement), this is not OBS until the 4th picture where she was CLEARLY impeded before the fielder had possession of the ball.

And THAT said ... all of the questions and the posting of the first 3 pictures alone clearly tell me the OP is looking at the wrong thing when judging obstruction.

I have to slightly disagree. In the final pic it does appear the ball is in the tip of the glove to me. It is not clear enough to say that it isn't in the glove, thus no possession.

With that said, I agree that in the totality of the pictures, this would appear to be an early slide directly caused by the position of the defensive player who did not have the ball.

Based solely on these pictures, I can't see how I would not have an obstruction call on this play.

It doesn't meet the definition of possession (e.g., catch). The runner's ability to arrive at 2nd base was delayed by a defender not in possession of the ball. That much is clear.

I would go further to say she likely went into an early slide due to the defender's positioning several feet in front of the base (without possession of the ball). The act of sliding may be natural and appropriate, but not that early and far from the base. I would err on the side of penalizing the defender, and that's coming from the last person to be labeled "obstruction happy."