the last obstruction post ever(just kidding)

[MNBlue]

But in my scenario, in the coache's mind, there was no risk because he thought the hit was a triple and his player was protected to third.

Stupid or not, the coach is basing his decision on what he thinks I am thinking. And just like coaches don't think the same, not everyone has the same perspective on to where runners should be protected.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MNBlue

Mike,

I have always had a problem with the DDB signal for obstruction, i.e., how does the runner and/or coach know to what base we are protecting the runner? We may not think it is important, but I believe savy runners/coaches will use the protection to take at least that base, where inexperienced runners will not contiune to the protected base.

I have always felt it was incumbant upon us as officials to communicate with the participants any rulings we make that can affect their decision making. If they don't know to where they are protected, we are forcing them to read our minds, possibly limiting their choices.

I have no such problem. As far as I'm concerned, the players and coaches should be playing and coaching based on the play as it unfolds in front of them. An OBS call is not a strategy, nor should it provide one

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MNBlue

But in my scenario, in the coache's mind, there was no risk because he thought the hit was a triple and his player was protected to third.

Stupid or not, the coach is basing his decision on what he thinks I am thinking. And just like coaches don't think the same, not everyone has the same perspective on to where runners should be protected.

Sorry, but that's the coach's problem, not the umpire's. There are just as many non-OBS plays when a coach believes one thing or another that doesn't come to fruition on the base paths.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by MNBlue

But in my scenario, in the coache's mind, there was no risk because he thought the hit was a triple and his player was protected to third.

Stupid or not, the coach is basing his decision on what he thinks I am thinking. And just like coaches don't think the same, not everyone has the same perspective on to where runners should be protected.

No, it's ALL risk, since he doesn't KNOW what we are thinking...

And it's NO reward, since if he doesn't send her, and we were going to award 3rd anyway, she's going to get 3rd ... so sending her has absolutely NOTHING to gain, and EVERYTHING to lose.

If he's basing his decision on what he thinks you are thinking, and he has even the smallest portion of a working brain, he would NOT send her - since she's got 3rd anyway if you're going to give it to her.

All of your comments stem from someone thinking that the baserunner must attempt to attain the awarded base in order to get that award... and are quite bluntly, flat wrong. We should not be inventing mechanics to protect the stupid.

[tcblue13]

Originally Posted by Smiley

This was an error in the 2006 Book. See http://www.nfhs.org/scriptcontent/va...Footer=SB_FOOT

Thanks Smiley

Sorry Steve