Tag applied, ball dropped - Obstruction called

[rafking]

NSA
Catcher set for a good block at the plate. Ball arrives 5 feet prior to runner getting there and tag is presented. Ball is knocked out during the play and falls within reaching distance of catcher. Runner's slide hits catcher's foot and runner is halted 6 inches from reaching plate.

Runner make no attempt to touch plate. Catcher picks up the ball and tags runner.

Ump calls her safe for obstruction due to new rule.

Thoughts?

[Dakota]

Let's see...

1. Catcher sets up blocking the plate without the ball.
2. Catcher catches the thrown ball before the runner arrives. Possession of the ball now makes the block legal.
3. Runner slides into catcher's foot, the slide stops short of the plate but she knocks the ball loose. Slide makes the contact with the catcher legal (assuming legal slide).
4. Catcher reaches for the ball (no step required) picks up ball and tags runner.

Sounds like an out to me. ASA - too lazy to look up NSA at the moment.

[rafking]

I agree Tom.
The block was legal. The only way I could see an out being called is if the catcher while reaching for the ball intentionally uses her foot/body to block the runner from touching the plate.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Dakota
Let's see...

1. Catcher sets up blocking the plate without the ball.
2. Catcher catches the thrown ball before the runner arrives. Possession of the ball now makes the block legal.
3. Runner slides into catcher's foot, the slide stops short of the plate but she knocks the ball loose. Slide makes the contact with the catcher legal (assuming legal slide).
4. Catcher reaches for the ball (no step required) picks up ball and tags runner.

Sounds like an out to me. ASA - too lazy to look up NSA at the moment.

Tom,

I believe you are correct. Under ASA's rules, as long as the catcher had the ball at the time the sliding runner made contact, she fulfilled the requirements to avoid an obstruction call.

Don't know about NSA. Nor did I know they changed their rules.

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA

Tom,

I believe you are correct. Under ASA's rules, as long as the catcher had the ball at the time the sliding runner made contact, she fulfilled the requirements to avoid an obstruction call.

Don't know about NSA. Nor did I know they changed their rules.

NSA's rule for OBSTRUCTION Sec. 37. Definitions.
b. A fielder, while not in possession of the ball or in the
act of fielding a batter ball or about to receive--etc..etc..
The same as the old ASA and other associations rule. The 2004 Rules
are not out, but the changes are and it seems that they decided to
retain the old rule and not the new that others have gone to. No ball
obstruction.

In rafking's case, would you consider 5 feet about to receive the
ball? That is the decision the umpire would have had to make.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by whiskers_ump
In rafking's case, would you consider 5 feet about to receive the ball? That is the decision the umpire would have had to make.

So, the old ASA rule applies. That should make it less likely to get an obs call, not more likely.

Up to the original contact, F2 was not obstructing under either the old or the new rule, since she had possession of the ball and was making a tag.

Upon contact, the ball was knocked loose.

Is the fielder now obligated to vacate the area between the stationary runner (who slid short of the base) before retreiving the ball? I can't believe that is required.

F2 did a legal block of the base and kept the runner short. The runner did a legal slide to knock the ball loose. F2's job at this point is to retrieve the ball. R1's job is to try to reach the base.

F2 did her job. R1 didn't. I still think it is an out.

[Skahtboi]

Originally posted by Dakota
F2 did her job. R1 didn't. I still think it is an out.

Ditto!

[Del-Blue]

Out. no other discussion.