ASA OBS call then no call leads to ejection

[DaveASA/FED]

Had a 16U tourney this last weekend that had two OBS calls (well 1 call and 1 no call) on the same team that lead to an ejection. Situation1: Runner rounds 3rd F2 at plate, throw coming in from outfield, F2 blocks plate, "is sitting on plate before she has the ball." (according to FU on field). Play at plate PU calls runner out, FU steps in and awards runner home on OBS call. Def coach upset and has words with FU.
Next game for them (back to back) 2nd inning catcher has ball and blocks home plate and gets runner out. Coach wants OBS as they got called against them in the last game. After words with PU, asst. coach gets promoted as Manager is leaving.

I was off for both games, did not see situation 1 as scorers building was blocking me, but did not like FU's explaintion of why he called OBS, he said "As runner was rounding 3rd, catcher was already blocking the plate, she was sitting on it when she caught the ball." What I didn't like about that is #1 if runner contacted, or altered her travel in any way prior to her having the ball then I am ok with that, like we have discussed here before. But what I didn't like was the call based on her being in the way. Does everyone agree here that there has to be OBS (runner forced to change something due to defense) before OBS can be called?? Or does anyone agree just being in the way is good enough, even if runner is not adversly affected by their actions?? And we won't even get into the FU basically overruling the PU whole other story!

I saw situation #2 and there was no OBS, had ball 2 steps prior to tag at plate, coach did not understand the difference between having and not having the ball I think! Or maybe the 1st call was bad based on perceived OBS with there might not have been any.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by DaveASA/FED
Does everyone agree here that there has to be OBS (runner forced to change something due to defense) before OBS can be called??

The runner must be impeded for there to be OBS. I think that is what you meant.

Originally posted by DaveASA/FED
Or does anyone agree just being in the way is good enough, even if runner is not adversly affected by their actions??

I don't - the defense may be any where they please so long as they don't impede the runner when it is not legal to do so.

Originally posted by DaveASA/FED
I saw situation #2 and there was no OBS, had ball 2 steps prior to tag at plate, coach did not understand the difference between having and not having the ball I think! Or maybe the 1st call was bad based on perceived OBS with there might not have been any.

All this means is there could not be OBS during that final 2 steps. It says nothing about the previous 10 steps.

Impeding the runner is the illegal act, not blocking the base or blocking the base line.

In situation #2, if the runner slowed or adjusted her base path in response to the catcher being in the way before the catcher had the ball, that is OBS, even if the catcher did catch the ball just prior to the runner arriving at the plate.

The question to ask is, at the time the runner was impeded, did the fielder have possession of the ball?

Whether she obtained possession after that is irrelevant.

[mcrowder]

I would add that it was not the calls (which, to me, sound like they very likely were correct calls) that led to the ejections ... it was the manager's inability to keep his mouth in check when discussing the calls.

Sit 1 - just because the BU (FU just sounds wrong...) didn't explain every nuance to you, in the stands, doesn't mean he didn't see EXACTLY what is required for OBS - that is, an obstructed runner.

Sit 2 - This was PROBABLY the right call, although there is always the chance that runner slowed because of the fielder in her path without the ball. But both of these were HTBT's.

[DaveASA/FED]

mcrowder
I agree with you, but for clarification we were discussing this play after the game as umpires, not a stands debate. and he also stated that he decided is was going to be OBS as soon as she rounded 3rd and the catcher was standing on the base without the ball. Your right is was a HTBT call, and your also right the manager got him self thrown out of the game with his actions. Life is 10% what happens and 90% how you react to it!!!

[bluezebra]

"Play at plate PU calls runner out, FU steps in and awards runner home on OBS call. Def coach upset and has words with FU."

HORRIBLE!!! If a PU allows this to happen, he/she is a gutless jerk who has no business umpiring. And, if a FU(BU) tried pulling that dumb stunt on me, I would say in no uncertain terms, "That's MY call, and the runner is OUT. You have no right to try to overrule my call. Work YOUR position, and I'll work MINE. If you try that again, we're going to have a 'discussion' in the parking lot after the game".

[scottk_61]

Originally posted by bluezebra
"Play at plate PU calls runner out, FU steps in and awards runner home on OBS call. Def coach upset and has words with FU."

HORRIBLE!!! If a PU allows this to happen, he/she is a gutless jerk who has no business umpiring. And, if a FU(BU) tried pulling that dumb stunt on me, I would say in no uncertain terms, "That's MY call, and the runner is OUT. You have no right to try to overrule my call. Work YOUR position, and I'll work MINE. If you try that again, we're going to have a 'discussion' in the parking lot after the game".

I cant' believe that you would rather protect your area than get the call right.
I hope that you have just had a bad evening when you wrote this BZ and this isn't really your attitude.
It isn't an overrule of a call but additional information that you need to take into account.
Your response sounds more like ego than reality.
If you are my partner and have definate knowledge, give me what you have.
If my feelings can't handle a correction, then maybe it is time to get off of the field.

Don't you think?

[TexBlue]

Originally posted by bluezebra
"Play at plate PU calls runner out, FU steps in and awards runner home on OBS call. Def coach upset and has words with FU."

HORRIBLE!!! If a PU allows this to happen, he/she is a gutless jerk who has no business umpiring. And, if a FU(BU) tried pulling that dumb stunt on me, I would say in no uncertain terms, "That's MY call, and the runner is OUT. You have no right to try to overrule my call. Work YOUR position, and I'll work MINE. If you try that again, we're going to have a 'discussion' in the parking lot after the game".

Actually, I believe you have the wrong slant on this. The BU (FU brings up bad thoughts) is allowed to make the call anywhere on the field when he sees it, just like the PU. He didn't overrule anyone. In this, I am just like you, no one is gonna overrule me on my field. No one. But, one partner may have missed something and the other saw it. I've seen both partners raise their arm for OBS and the PU drop his when he sees that his partner has the call also. He can take of other stuff. That's called teamwork, not overrulling.

It sounds like you want to separate lines of responsibility in the infield. Ie, you take everything on 1st and 3rd and I've got everything else. Or maybe you draw an X from 1st to 3rd and 2nd to Home and designate areas that your partner can't cover. Personally, I want every bit of info I can get to make sure I get the call right. I have absolutely no problem changing my call when I ask for help and get info from my partner. Again, I don't think this is an overruling situation. It's just a call that the BU is allowed to make.

[mcrowder]

ANYONE can call obstruction - it's the responsibility of the umpire that SEES it to call it. It's entirely possible that for some reason the PU was watching the ball at the time of the obstruction. This is not an overrule, and BU MUST call it if he sees it.

[IRISHMAFIA]

All are correct on shared responsibilities, but I don't believe it has anything to do with the original post.

Speaking ASA

If the BU determined it was obstruction solely because he saw the defender sit on/block the plate, he misapplied the rule. As has been stated numerous times, that is not a violation of any rule.

[ChampaignBlue]

What we don't know is what the BU saw that caused the OBS call.

Did the runner turn to the coach for guidance on should she run into the catcher and in the process slow down? Was there a stutter step detected to set up for a slide that would not have been necessary had the catcher not set up on the plate? Did the runner change her path in an attempt to find a way into the plate?

As was stated earlier, the runner has to have something changed before an OBS gets called and some of those things may have been seen by the BU while the PU was watching the throw come in.

This may not be an over ruling. It would be as if I'm the BU and I see the runner obstructed rounding 1st on a gapper and there's a play at the plate on an inside the park home run attempt and my left arm is still sticking out, I wait for my partner to make the call then I come in with the OBS safe call.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by ChampaignBlue
What we don't know is what the BU saw that caused the OBS call.

errr....yeah, we do. From the original post:

but did not like FU's explaintion of why he called OBS, he said "As runner was rounding 3rd, catcher was already blocking the plate, she was sitting on it when she caught the ball."

[/B]

[Robmoz]

Originally posted by ChampaignBlue

This may not be an over ruling. It would be as if I'm the BU and I see the runner obstructed rounding 1st on a gapper and there's a play at the plate on an inside the park home run attempt and my left arm is still sticking out, I wait for my partner to make the call then I come in with the OBS safe call.

Are you protecting this runner all the way to home when obstructed rounding 1st?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Robmoz

Are you protecting this runner all the way to home when obstructed rounding 1st?

What is the problem with that? As stated, it was a gapper and if the umpire believes the obstruction caused the runner to be put out prior to reaching the base s/he would have had the obstruction not occurred, then it is the correct call.

[ChampaignBlue]

"errr....yeah, we do. From the original post:"

Actually what I was refering to was what action did the runner make that caused the left arm to come out, slowed down, stutter step, what? I mean that if I were a runner rounding 3rd and the catcher was blocking the plate I'd keep running to see if she's going to clear out before I get there, if not I slide or go around and trust to the impecable judgement of the umpire. Blocking the plate in of itself is not OBS until it actually does affect the runner and I don't see in the original posting what did the runner do.

[Robmoz]

[i]Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
What is the problem with that? As stated, it was a gapper and if the umpire believes the obstruction caused the runner to be put out prior to reaching the base s/he would have had the obstruction not occurred, then it is the correct call.

[/B]

[i]

It seems too difficult to determine if the runner would have gained 4 bases had there been no OBS at 1B (gapper notwithstanding).

Q. If the umpire determines that a triple is probable and B1 decides to round and go for home only to be tagged out does B1 get the call for OBS and safe?

As a judgment situation, I am looking for a guide in determining how far do I protect the runner (specfically when OBS at 1B). Are you saying I must go all the way to the base that B1 is attempting to attain?



(Sorry for the italics, I could not figure out how to change it.)