OBS rule (ASA)

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by Bandit
Watch out for NFHS to take on this application of the rule in the future. Then watch coaches come unglued.

If Walter Sparks has any pull at all, it will be implemented
in NFHS in 05. Called in a tournament where is granddaughter
was participating, and we had this very discussion. He said he was
almost certain NFHS would go along with ASA on this.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
...merely a change in the conditions upon which the rule goes into effect..

Aha... strange as it sounds, Mike, that little phrase helps a lot. Sometimes, you just need somebody to hit you with the obvious.

Possession = legal to impede.

No possession = not legel to impede.

Simple. Easy.

Means there is no longer a simultaneous arrival exception.
Means there is no longer a "step and reach" exception.

Also, on the last microsec possession - it is highly likely the runner was impeded (caused to slow down, change path, try to avoid contact, etc.) prior to contact (assuming the defender was blocking the base without the ball). That, also, is OBS.

[chuck chopper]

What I was trying to say earlier was that I now "SAY" obstruction way TOO SOON. I have the delayed call sign on at the time OBS happens, but need to wait to see if there is an out before SAYING obstruction. Many times the runner makes it to the plate/base anyhow. This mistake I want to make only happens at the plate when I feel I need to make a snap call. Before this year, the contact as the ball was arriving was " a big nothing" no delayed call or immediate call required.

[EugeneCoug]

When I talk about the new rule to folks I have begun by saying that it is a clarification rather than an entirely new concept. I don't know if it helps to do that, but it sure makes it easier when talking to people not familiar with the old rule (e.g., parents new to ASA, who may be more familiar with baseball and how they were "taught" to block a base).

What I've seen lately in many games (not just ours) that I'm surprised about is the failure to detect (and signal) obstruction when a baserunner reacts to an ill-positioned fielder. The new rule, for some reason, has made me even more cognizant of improper blocking of the base than ever before. Perhaps that is because I am trying to teach better fielding technique and I see other teams' players do what the (old and new) rule prohibits. For example, fearless third baseman has been taught to block her base and positions herself way out in front of the bag. Baserunner who is inexperienced, timid or surprised by the fielder's position (or all three), slows down, hesitates, or, sometimes, tries to go around the fielder. I've even seen the baserunner in that situation slide two feet short of the base. All because the fielder is in the way. Without a collision, I've seen the runner called out just about every time. The hesitation and other reactive manuevering by the baserunner many times allows the ball to arrive before the baserunner and so the baserunner looks like dead meat. My point is that the intimidation resulting from the ill-positioned fielder can result in a skirting of the rule, because obstruction is not being called on the baserunner's reaction. Which rewards the third baseman's aggressiveness. And makes me wonder if I'm teaching the wrong technique to our fielders.

Any suggestion for discussing this situation with the umpire during the game?

[chuck chopper]

Gene, good keen observances and he "dead meat" situation happens quite often & it is up to the Umps to train themselves to detect that. Then once we see it and call it, its not something the coaches are likely to agree with.
.
Talking about it before the game never hurts. The summer season is almost over and still Obstruction gets discussed before every game.