NFHS 8-10.14 Change for 2006

[WestMichBlue]

In a previous post, Dakota talked about the NFHS crash rule and interference superceding obstruction in the 2005 book. I have written extensively on this subject on the NFHS Board, and discussed it at out local association meetings. I know that H.S. umpires are still struggling with this rule, so I brought it out here in a separate post for all NFHS umpires.

Dakota: "but the "about to catch" survived in the interference rule, even after it was taken out the OBS rule. It was still there in last year's book. This gives the umpire the ability to rule INT on a thrown ball if the runner CHOSE to crash rather than avoid."

Not a case of survival, Tom, but a mistake.

The ASA "crash" rule (8.7.Q) has a runner crashing into a defender that has the ball. So when ASA eliminated "about to receive" from obstruction in 2004 that change did not affect the crash rule.

However, when NFHS re-wrote Rule 8 in 2002 they added three little words (about to receive) to their version of the crash rule (8-6.14). When they changed the obstruction rule in 2005, they failed to fix the crash rule so we had a very convoluted rule last year which nobody seem to recognize.

If a defender did not have the ball, and a runner deviated, we had obstruction. But if the runner did not deviate (why should she - she is supposed to have an unimpeded right to the base) and made contact, the call was changed to interference, even though the defender did not have the ball.

What we were telling the runners was, "you must deviate and avoid contact at all costs (except for legal slide) and hope the umpire would call obstruction." Otherwise the runner was penalized (called out).

What the NFHS has said this year is that contact by a defender without the ball (even if initiated by the runner) is obstruction. Period.

Thus they re-wrote 8-6.14 to only cover staying on feet and causing malicious contact. MC (not interference) now supercedes obstruction. The Penalty section was re-written to make the penalty for MC an OUT and ejection.

If you want interference on a runner when the defender has the ball and is attempting to make a play, then fall back on 8-6.13.

I received the above interpretation from Randy Allen, Section 4 member of the SB Committee. He finished with "There is no incidental contact referenced in the rules book. Our goal is to more clearly define obstruction."


WMB