The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 11, 2018, 01:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Derry, NH
Posts: 1,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Slick View Post
Point of order (chair recognizes the gentleman from PA). In USA Softball:

A - If a runner and fielder collide while the fielder is playing (rule 1: play) on a batted ball, this is INT.

Not the case in the OP. (not a batted ball)

B - If a runner and fielder collide while the fielder is not playing the ball and NOT in possession of the ball, this is OBS.

Not the case in the OP. (fielder trying to catch thrown ball)

C - If a runner and fielder collide (and is the only "hindrance" i.e. there is no other hindrance or impediment) while the fielder is not playing the ball and the ball and runner "arrive at the same time", then you would not have obstruction. However, this is a very narrow "window" of time to happen.

A little confused on this one. If the fielder is not playing the ball, how then do the ball and runner arrive at the same time? Arrive where? This is close to the OP, where ball and runner arrive at the same time while F3 is trying to catch the ball (i.e. making a play).

D - If a runner and fielder collide while the fielder is not playing the ball and in possession of the ball, this could be: a) nothing, b) crash (8 8 Q 1,2) with an out only or c) crash with an out and ejection (8 8 Q 4).

While your statement is true, we need to train to make the judgement scenarios A and B. Scenario C is very very very low probability. Collisions will most likely have some result other than "nothing." The bad throw that pulls F3 into BR is obstruction.
In my OP, I did not call OBS because of the initial bump, although given another few seconds, might have. I called the OBS when F3 clearly tried climbing over the runner to retrieve the ball.

For those of you in the camp that OBS occurred before first base, would you suggest that there should have been 2 OBS calls? "Obstruction...Obstruction."
__________________
Ted
USA & NFHS Softball
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 11, 2018, 02:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PA
Posts: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu View Post
A little confused on this one. If the fielder is not playing the ball, how then do the ball and runner arrive at the same time? Arrive where? This is close to the OP, where ball and runner arrive at the same time while F3 is trying to catch the ball (i.e. making a play).
"Arrive" meaning the fielder, ball and runner all arrive/meet at the same location at the same time. This is describing what was formally referred to as a 'train wreak' which was a more popular term when "about to receive" was part of the rule. Back in the old days, ATR allowed for a collision between runner and fielder without the ball and no call.

Think about it: with the way the rule is written now, there is no "wriggle room" for collisions; possession is the key. If the throw pulls F3 into the runner, we have obstruction. But if the "hindrance" happened at the moment the fielder gained possession (i.e. "the EXACT moment") then we have the old fashioned train wreck. It is still (theoretically) possible, not not likely. Like I say, a very narrow window of time.


Quote:
In my OP, I did not call OBS because of the initial bump, although given another few seconds, might have. I called the OBS when F3 clearly tried climbing over the runner to retrieve the ball.
However, it most likely was obstruction.

Quote:
For those of you in the camp that OBS occurred before first base, would you suggest that there should have been 2 OBS calls? "Obstruction...Obstruction."
You can have two obstructions. I have, but at third: BR stretching for a triple, is obstructed going into third. I did not protect to third at the moment of obstruction because the ball, while not in possession of F5, was just about in the coach's box. As the runner and fielder get up to their feet, another obstruction happened, this time between ("on") third, so now I'm protecting to home. Yes, I gave two distinct obstruction signals.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 12, 2018, 09:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu View Post
So if I saw F3's OBS, and didn't think runner could have reached 2B, I'd be better off not calling OBS??
Never made even an insinuation to that

Quote:

We've all seen this scenario: base hit to the outfield; BR hustling all the way and takes a hard turn at first base when 3 or 4 steps later she runs right into F3 who is standing there. Runner did not intentionally run into F3, but couldn't avoid her.

Ball is fielded cleanly and returned promptly to the infield.

I have OBS, runner protected between first and second, but don't believe she would have made second absent the OBS.

What usually happens is the runner returns to first base, the first base coach complains about the OBS, and I say, yes, runner was OBS and I made that call.
Not applicable to the OP. There is nothing indicating the BR ever reached 1B.
My comments only apply to the given statement which means that all impediment occurred prior to the BR reaching 1B, hence there is no protection to 2B unless you judged the runner would have reached 2B sans the hindrance. However, since you did not award 2B to the OBS runner, that was not your belief which means she ran out of protective coverage and is liable to be put out.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 12, 2018, 09:59am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,166
OK, I read
"As B4 tried to get up to go to 2B, she was OBS by F3 trying to chase down the loose ball."
as on the base, having reached it after the initial collision.

Irish & others apparently read that as before 1st base.
No wonder we don't agree. ----- My post 2 days ago:
"Still, I think and hope that all 4 of us would be more in sync seeing the actual play, rather than the written description."

There were only 4 at that time, Young and Slick later, so now I would say the same about 6 of us.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 12, 2018, 10:50am
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu View Post
I thought we'd be good until the Defensive HC came out to tell me about a rule I didn't know about. According to him, once the runner had rounded first, she was committed to second base and could not return to first. And he wanted her to be called out. (We never did get into a discussion about the runner who scored, but that was in the back of my mind.)

I told the coach that his argument was incorrect. And he told me that he was 100% sure that he was right because he had seen it in the rules book.
"So, coach, when your batter-runner rounds first base on a clean single in the outfield, and she returns to first, should I rule her out for abandonment since she was committed to second base but didn't go there?"

Geez, where do they get these people to serve as coaches?
__________________
"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
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 12, 2018, 01:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Derry, NH
Posts: 1,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
Never made even an insinuation to that



Not applicable to the OP. There is nothing indicating the BR ever reached 1B.
My comments only apply to the given statement which means that all impediment occurred prior to the BR reaching 1B, hence there is no protection to 2B unless you judged the runner would have reached 2B sans the hindrance. However, since you did not award 2B to the OBS runner, that was not your belief which means she ran out of protective coverage and is liable to be put out.
Your first comment:
"If I'm reading this right, the OBS was between home and 1B. If that is the case, your protection would have to be to 2B for protection to exist beyond 1B. That means your award should have been 2B. However, by making the award 1B, you have basically stated your protection ended @ 1B."

I'll say that I didn't call the "first OBS", the one you identified as happening before the runner reached first base. I'm not getting your comment in red above.

Now I called the "second OBS", where the runner is on first base trying to get up. Since I called OBS there, the runner is protected between first and second. That doesn't mean the award should have been 2B. That is my judgment.
__________________
Ted
USA & NFHS Softball
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Sat Oct 13, 2018, 05:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu View Post
I'll say that I didn't call the "first OBS", the one you identified as happening before the runner reached first base. I'm not getting your comment in red above.
That is standard to any OBS rule. A runner is protected between the bases where OBS and/or to the base the umpire judged the runner would have reached without the OBS. Your award indicates you only protected the runner to 1B. Once the runner passes that base (1B), s/he has placed themselves in jeopardy.

Quote:
Now I called the "second OBS", where the runner is on first base trying to get up. Since I called OBS there, the runner is protected between first and second. That doesn't mean the award should have been 2B. That is my judgment.
The OP did not indicate the BR ever physically reached 1B at the time of the 2nd entanglement which is why I responded in the manner I did.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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
World Series call/no call discussion SWFLguy Softball 24 Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:15pm
Protested the Game RookieDude Basketball 9 Mon Oct 29, 2012 01:51pm
Urgent Protested Game Question CoachCanavan Softball 11 Fri May 14, 2004 04:08pm
Protested game greymule Softball 9 Tue Apr 13, 2004 10:16am
Protested ruling droobie Baseball 1 Fri Jun 07, 2002 07:16pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:21am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1