Obstruction, Look Back--NFHS
 

NFHS varsity game. B hits line drive to right center and runs to 1B. F3 is standing on 1B. Collision results in B/R falling to the ground. FU gives delayed dead ball signal. B/R stands up and goes to 1B, making no attempt toward 2B. Meanwhile, the ball is thrown to the pitcher, who is within the circle. Fans are hollering for B/R to go to 2B because she was "interfered" with (yes, I know obstruction is correct) and is entitled to 2B. Offensive coach at 1B apparently agrees and instructs the B/R to go 2B. B/R steps off 1B toward 2B. Time had not been called. Is the B/R out?

If OBS was called, or play suspended, probably not.

The OBS at the base means no put out between 1st & 2nd.
But, once the runner stops at a base, any advancement has to be awarded by an umpire.
In this case, I think the step off and the LBR call are separate from the runner advancing on the original play, so the "no put out between bases" would not apply.

I would call it an out.

Can we retrain the baseball coaches? :rolleyes:

I believe there is a case play on it but not sure if I have seen it in the use or nfhs case plays.

I do not see where an LBR violation is an exception allowing a OBS runner to be called out between the two bases.

Not the exact play and it is from USA, but as Irish stated, the lookback rule is not listed as an exception to the obstruction rule.

Play: With no outs, R1 on 1B, B2 hits a ground ball to the outfield. R1 rounds 2B and is obstructed halfway to 3B. B2 is standing still between 2B and 3B when the ball is returned to F1 in the circle. F1 makes no attempt to play on R1. Immediately after F1 receives the ball in the circle, R1 starts moving back toward 2B. Prior to reaching 2B, R1 reverses her direction and runs safely to 3B. What is the ruling?
Ruling: Once R1, the obstructed runner, violates the Look Back Rule, the umpire should call dead ball, and award R1and B2 the base or bases which would have been reached, in the umpire’s judgment, had there not been obstruction. Violation of the Look Back Rule does not meet any of the exceptions of protecting the runner between the bases they were obstructed. Rule 8, Section 7T [1-2] EFFECT: and Rule 8, Section 5B [2] Exception.

Since the B/R did not attempt to go to 2B but went safely back to 1B, it would seem to me that the obstruction protection between bases was off because the B/R made it safely to 1B. The LBR would now be in effect, no?

The lookback rule says nothing about a runner must attempt to advance in order to be awarded a base. It is the umpires judgement as to where the runner would have reached and at the end of playing action, or when the obstructed runner is put out before reaching the base they would have the umpire is to award the runner the base or bases they would have reached absent the obstruction.

As for cancelling obstruction, per the rule, obstruction is not cancelled until the runner reaches the base the umpire judges they would have absent the obstruction, AND there is a subsequent play on a different runner.

This is the key. Short of INT or malicious contact/collision, there's not much an obstructed runner can do which results in an out. If the OBS-runner violates the LBR, the ball is dead and we ignore LBR, and award bases accordingly. (EDIT to add: The rationale is that the defense erred first....we do not penalize the offense for their base running violation (LBR) on the same pitch after the defense has already violated.)

Somehow, I completely screwed up a situation similar to this last weekend (the OBS-runner was rounding 3B). The runner was going to score, but was obstructed. She fell down and returned to 3B where she was tagged after reaching safely. My brain fell out, and I did not properly award home.

Yes, but as noted above, the LBR is not an exception which negates an OBS call

Rule citation?

The 2 elements needed for the exception were not in effect, but at what point is all play to have been considered stopped (which I thought was an element as well)?

How long, with the pitcher in possession in the circle, can the runner (standing still on 1B) wait before taking off for 2B, and still be protected by the original OBS call?

It seems to me that the BU, as soon as all play has come to its conclusion, should go ahead and call Time, announce that he/she had obstruction, and then announce where he/she is placing the runner. Either he/she says, "Time; Obstruction on the First Base Person. Runner goes to second," or "...Runner stays at first."

To me, this shouldn't be a case where the BU just says nothing if he/she judges the runner is already on the awarded base. A little bit of preventive medicine goes a long way.

This thread kind of revived some points on obstruction from a post last year about when exactly is obstruction over. As to the original play in this thread, the lookback rule is not an exception to the obstruction rule, so the runner cannot be called out for committing a lookback violation. However, there was a comment about when the runner returned to 1st base, the obstruction was cancelled. That is not the case.

The obstruction rule has 2 elements that must be met to cancel the obstruction. 1, the obstructed runner must reach the base the umpire judges they would have absent the obstruction, AND 2, there must be a subsequent play on a different runner. Unless both of those elements are met, the obstruction is still in place and the runner cannot be put out between the 2 bases where obstructed.

There was a long draw out thread last year on a FB NFHS softball forum about a play involving a pick off at 2nd base and the runner thrown at attempting to advance to 3rd. The umpires ruled the obstruction was cancelled when the runner returned to 2nd and the out at 3rd stood. There was even a UIC on site that confirmed the ruling. In response I posted a play I had where a batter/runner was obstructed rounding 1st on a bad throw, F9 was backing up the play and after initially starting toward 2nd, the runner thought better of it and returned to 1st base. The ball was thrown to the pitcher who was not in the circle when suddenly the 1st base coach tells the runner, he called obstruction, you get 2nd base and the runner just started trotting toward 2nd. The pitcher ran over and tagged the runner. Again, the vast majority of responses where the out stands because the runner returned to 1st base cancelling the obstruction. Many even claimed the exception did not apply because there were no other runners on base. Someone managed to get the play sent to NFHS national and they just replied this week with their answer.

RKB, that is the play I'm questioning:

Ordinary single to F9. BR rounds 1B and is obstructed. Returns to 1B and stands on it.

Ball is relayed from F9 to F5 to F1 (in the circle).

BR takes off for 2B:
1. after F5's relay, but before ball is caught by F1.
2. after ball is caught by F1.

In either case. BR is tagged out at 2B.

In 1, BR is still protected, and returned to 1B, because both elements of the exception are not met.
In 2, is it not a LBR violation? And if not, how long does F1 have to have possession before it is?

We don't call time and award the base (if she's on the awarded base), so what else ends the play?

A lookback violation is not one of the exceptions to the obstruction rule that would allow the runner to be called out.

Not saying LBR is one of the exceptions.

I'm asking, when is the play considered over, if not when the ball is in the circle, and runner is on the base they would have been awarded?

As I mentioned in my earlier post on this scenario, why wouldn't the BU call Time as soon as the ball is in the circle, make the announcement that he/she had Obstruction, and just say the runner stays at first base? It provides closure on the violation (everyone presumably saw the DDB signal), and prevents the mess you're describing.

But if you really insist on not saying anything after F1 has the ball in the circle, I'm still not calling a LBR violation should the runner be instructed to go to second base. The last play and any violations that took place are still viable, IMHO, until the pitcher delivers a pitch (legal or illegal).

That's how we handle other situations like appeal plays for runners missing bases, batting out of order violations, use of illegal equipment, etc. etc. We still recognize that the violation exists and can be ruled upon until that pitcher delivers the next pitch.

So even if F1 has the ball in the circle, walks up to the plate, steps on the plate, and keeps her hands separated as she looks in for the sign, I'm recognizing that the previous BR who was obstructed STILL cannot be put out between those two bases. If she comes off at that point and heads to second, I'm calling Time and putting her back to first. And then I'm likely going to eject the defensive head coach.

But why set myself up for that much trouble? Just call Time when play is over, and announce the Obstruction violation with the runner remaining on first base.

I understand wanting to avoid the hassle, but we don't call time (to announce the award) in any other OBS situation where the runner is safely on the base she should've reached.

In the past thread that was referred to, one element mentioned was, F5 (while running the ball back to the pitcher) asks for TIME, in order to end the play.

I was told in no uncertain terms, we do NOT grant time for F5. We tell her, "if you want the play to end, get the ball in the circle." (paraphrased)

So, here, the ball's in the circle, but the consensus here is, the play is still not over?

There are times when a pitcher can be still considered a fielder while in the circle, where we pause before enacting the LBR, but that's not the case here.

It does seem as though there should be some end point after the OBS call and the ball is in the circle.

You could have a runner dancing back and forth off first base that most will recognize as a LBR violation.

Heck, the runner could break for second base while F1 is taking her signal. (I guess that is the opposite of a delayed steal. :D )

If an umpire doesn't call time, what happens if the runner from first leaves early on the next pitch. Do we have an out for leaving early, or are we still protecting that runner from the OBS call??

Hmmmmm.....an umpire calling time when all obvious play is complete.......in a FP game.....who would ever come up with such an idea? :)

Guess that tickles your fancy! :)

Where is that written? I've often heard umpires say this, but is it a mandated exception to the mechanic?

In my experience, if I say nothing after I call obstruction, inevitably somebody is going to ask the question, "Hey Blue, what about your obstruction call?" So I've always killed play and given a quick explanation for preventive purposes. Nobody has ever told me I shouldn't do it.

Now, I obviously won't bother if the obstructed runner ends up scoring on the play.

Let's play a fun little game of Rulebook Lawyer. We can all agree that (by rule) an OBS runner cannot be called out between the bases she is obstructed, on the play that she was obstructed, for anything not listed as an exception. The question at hand is: when does one play end and another begin?

The forum refers to the Appellate Court for this question: literally, appeals. I believe we can all agree as an axiom that all appeals must made on or after the play during which the appealable situation happened, in other words "before the NEXT play". Any appeal, be it live-ball/dead-ball/BOO, must be made before the next pitch legal or illegal (by rule). We can use this to assume that the start of the next pitch is the start of the next play, and since fastpitch is a live-ball game, it is also the end of the previous play. If for some reason an umpire declares TIME, the play has ended for the purposes of base running, but not for appeals. NFHS rules require the plate umpire to "point the ball live" before play resumes.

This raises a new question. When does the pitch occur? It does NOT occur when the ball is thrown by the pitcher. It does not occur when the hands come together. Ignoring pre-pitch violations resulting in an IP, the pitch begins when the pitcher separates her hands to start a legal delivery. Until that point, the pitcher can legally remove herself from the pitching plate by stepping back, and no "next" pitch has occurred.

Thus, as to the first question: The play is considered over when the hands separate for the next legal pitch, or when an IP is called prior to the hands separating, or an umpire calls TIME.

As to the second question: An OBS runner leaving early on the next pitch would be called out, as the play on which she was OBS is over, and the next pitch started. However, if the OBS runner was to leave so early that the pitcher had not yet separated her hands, we would have an LBR violation instead. The ball would be dead, and the runner would be returned to her base....unless an umpire had called TIME and/or made awards which were properly touched by runners before the ball was again made live by the plate umpire.

Feel free to pick this semi-TWP analysis apart for purposes of discussion. I'm not an official rules interpreter, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once. :D

So in a nutshell, your premise is, a play is not over until the next play begins.

Unless an umpire calls time, or the ball is dead by rule.

I try to read the rulebook and casebook cover to cover before every season (and for reference during ;) ), and I just don't recall ever reading that interpretation.

You may be 100% right. To be honest, I don't know exactly when a play ends by rule, and the next one begins. It's a little like Supreme Court definition of obscenity: you know it when you see it. I'm just stringing known rules together in an attempt to answer a question that is not explicitly covered in the book.

The loophole here with the OBS runner and subsequent violations is that a "play" is not defined (as discussed above), but a pitch ,and its various outcomes, is defined. I'm trying to fill that loophole for purposes of discussion and clarity by equating a pitch to a play, using the rules. If we replace the word "play" with "pitch" in all of the posts in this thread, I think my logic holds up. Note that I'm not attempting to conflate the "initial play" or "subsequent play" definitions as they apply to OBS. I'm just trying to create a rule-driven definition of "THE PLAY".

I don't think this works. The rule requires a subsequent play on another RUNNER not just another subsequent play. If so, then you can't get out of this by calling the pitch a play. It is a play but not a play on a runner.

Can you expand on this? If we accept that the next pitch isn't a play, then that would protect the OBS runner way beyond the intent of the rule.

"Is a pitch a play" seems to have been discussed before. I think NCAA folks claim that pitching or catching is considered a "play".

NFHS definition of play:
ART 2 Make a Play
a. Any action by the pitcher intended to cause a reaction from the runner(s) as it pertains to the look-back rule. (Some are arguing that the OBS voids this as a play.)
b. Any action by a fielder who is attempting to catch or gain control of a batted or thrown ball.
c. An attempt by a defensive player to retire a runner or a batter-runner. (Maybe this semi-applies, but if the defense does manage to tag the runner off a base, that will kill the play and the runner will be placed accordingly.)

In the Umpires' Manual, page 35, bottom of the page.
Obstruction: The base umpire should immediately:
1. Give the.....
2. When the play becomes dead, make the proper OBS award.

So, if'n we have no "plays", what makes the play dead besides the runner being tagged off a base or an umpire calling "time"?

The obstruction rule does not cancel the obstructed runners protection until a play is made on a different runner. If you are going to be a rule book literalist, then you'd have to keep protecting her through the pitch because that isn't a play on a runner. (It's a play, just not on the runner). The only solution here is to "fix-up" the rulebook. To me that actually does mean the play ends when the pitcher has control and is getting ready to pitch.

Or you can just call time when all obvious play is complete. The "live ball game" is a myth.

This is something that occurs thousands of times a day all over the country and it works fine, does not deny any team any opportunities and helps the game move along at a decent pace.

But you all know where I stand :)

True Mike, but if you think about this happening at game speed, why would one be calling time here?

You see your runner stop at 1B after being OBS right there. End of story.

You see the ball back in the circle, no subsequent play. End of story.

Your hustling back to your position, and BANG, there goes the runner!

Im not saying the timeout is wrong, Im saying that in the normal no-action, between-play situation, we wouldn't be doing it just to get back to our position.

It's why we tell 'em to get it in the circle.

Have never suggested a "time" call be instantaneous. As you noted in your description, all play must have been over since it was "end of story". Just kill the ball and hustle back into position. Since you have called time, if a runner tries to advance, you just tell her to get back on the appropriate base and move on.

And because the ball is dead, both umpires can hustle to their position simultaneously instead of one watching the runner while the other moves.

Gotcha Mike. An easy way to avoid having to make and defend the most unusual ruling in the book. I like it. :)

In discussions with a multitude of colleagues, I have found not 1 who would ever make that call (protect the runner and bring her back to 1B), including NCAA officials.

Guarantee I'd have no UIC backing me up in the case of a protest.

Cannot believe I missed this exception in the rulebook. Likely renders much of this discussion moot.

NCAA 9.5.7 An obstructed runner may not be called out between the two bases where she was obstructed unless one of the following occurs.

(all the other previously discussed exceptions are listed, then)

9.5.7.8 The umpire determines the runner is clearly beaten by the throw.

Can someone please tell me how I'd reconcile this exception to an OC? A runner who is obstructed rounding the base could very likely be put out by a mile at the next bag. How can the rule itself even exist with this exception in place?

Please tell me I'm missing something blatantly apparent here...

Actually, I have always done exactly that. If your arm goes up, it is quite likely the coach and other players saw it and are going to expect an explanation. Most likely because their belief that a runner should always be advanced.

Not only does it provide an explanation for the signal, but makes everyone aware you were on top of the play, have the rules knowledge to recognize the violation, make the appropriate award and you are willing to make such a call. I only added that last part because I have constantly been told by folks that umpires don't make OBS calls.

This portion of the rule has been explained to me like this:

You have to take this statement: "The umpire determines the runner is clearly beaten by the throw." in conjunction with the part of the rule that states that "blocking a base is obstruction"

If the fielder is blocking a base, but the runner is "clearly beaten by the throw", then there is no obstruction.

This is ambiguous. No make the out call or not make the protect call ?

Are you saying that overrides the umpire judgement of which base the runner would have reached w/o OBS?

Even though I don't need NCAA rulings.

No, I am saying that, after she rounds first base and is obstructed, and returns to first base and stands there, if she takes off for second base and is put out by a large margin, she is no longer protected by virtue of this additional exception.
Am I not reading this correctly?

I believe this forum covers high-level rules interpretations… I can honestly say that I don’t know of a single umpire, USA, NCAA, pony, that 1. knows this exception (being on the base and a subsequent play on another runner) and 2. would enforce it once they did learn of it.
I’ve had discussions with colleagues about this exact exception, and have been told in no uncertain terms “there is no way I would reinstate the obstruction protection once she stops at 1b and then takes off again. No way.”
I feel as though I am the only umpire , besides everyone on this forum, that knows this rule.

They aren't reinstating anything, it never went away. And if they refuse to apply the rule as it is written, they are just begging for a protest they are going to lose.

While looking up something on another matter in the NFHS book, I came across an exception in regards to the LBR. I remembered this discussion, re-read it, and didn't see this particular action mentioned.

It doesn't relate to the OBS portion of the discussion.

8.7 Exception includes a statement that:

"a fake throw is considered a play."

Just wanted to remember to add it here.