The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 26, 2005, 09:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 293
Catcher catches the ball, blocks the plate and then on the slide the ball comes out. The ball is on the ground by the glove.

As the runner struggles to get her foot to the base the catcher falls on her as she tries to get the ball. Do we have obstruction?

The runner actually got to the plate in time on my play tonight but I wondered if she hadn't what I would have had on that play.

Fed. ball

__________________
ASA,NCAA,FED,NAFA
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2005, 01:33am
Never Stop Learning
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 518
Seems to me that after she lost possession of the ball she no longer had the right to block the plate. Tough one to sell because she had possession on the origional play but lost possession when they got tangled up. I'd have had safe at home for the obstruction or in your case just plain safe.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2005, 03:32am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 382
No tough sell .
We have obstruction .
A defensive player has impeded the runner delayed dead ball and if tagged out dead ball safe at home .
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2005, 11:47am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 92
Lucy, you have some 'splainin to do!

I would agree with the reply posts that OB should be called. but, this is all going to happen so fast, you really have to sell it, not just by being loud and clear, but probably by explaining it to the coach that the call is going against.

__________________
Troy
ASA/NFHS
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2005, 12:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 10
I don't know that I would be so quick to call this obstruction. If as a result of the play, without an obstruction call, the ball is dropped by F2 and the only thing we have is the runner trying to touch home and F2 trying to retrieve the ball to make a play I don't know that I would call OBS. Without having seen the play if F2 just fell and the runner could still get to the plate probably not, if F2 just laid on her then probably so. Either way I can't see this as an obvious OBS and I think it's gonna be a tough sell to one or the other of the coaches.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2005, 12:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
If F2 is not in her way, why would the runner have been "scrambling" to try to get to the plate. Sounds obvious to me that F2 WAS in the way - hence OBS. The phrase "falls on her" couldn't be any more clear.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2005, 02:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: woodville, tx
Posts: 3,156
I agree with everyone that says OBS. Had it happen on a couple of occassions this
year and it is not a hard sell....No ball, OBS.

__________________
glen _______________________________
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things
that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines.
Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails.
Explore. Dream. Discover."
--Mark Twain.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2005, 03:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally posted by Ol Blue
Either way I can't see this as an obvious OBS and I think it's gonna be a tough sell to one or the other of the coaches.
I can, especially when you have a catcher not in possession of the ball FALLING on top of the runner after the initial play.
__________________
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
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat May 28, 2005, 12:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
I don't remember anything in the OBS rules about initial non-possession versus secondary non-possession.
__________________
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
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat May 28, 2005, 12:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally posted by CecilOne
I don't remember anything in the OBS rules about initial non-possession versus secondary non-possession.
Read the scenario again. The catcher had possession of the ball which permits her to block the base. The legal slide caused the catcher to lose possession of the ball AFTER the act which would have been ruled OBS had the catcher not had the ball. If this catcher moves to the loose ball without any further impediment to the runner, I don't rule OBS because all of the parameters of the play were met.

In this case, when the runner tried to progress further and the catcher without the ball fell on her, THAT is obstruction.
__________________
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
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sat May 28, 2005, 01:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Quote:
Originally posted by CecilOne
I don't remember anything in the OBS rules about initial non-possession versus secondary non-possession.
... snip ... In this case, when the runner tried to progress further and the catcher without the ball fell on her, THAT is obstruction.
1) I agreed with you about ("a catcher not in possession of the ball FALLING on top of the runner after the initial play").
2) The phrase "catcher without the ball fell on her, THAT is obstruction" is the secondary non-possession I referred to. The point being that impeding the runner without having possession is OBS, even if the fielder had possession previously.
__________________
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
Reply

Bookmarks


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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:22am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1