Diff of Opinion - Obstruction Jurisdiction

[SC Ump]

Thanks Steve. This is good information. I'm surprised that the NCAA manual did not explain what the eye-contact meant. Without other instruction I would think eye-contact from my partner would mean that they were seeking assistance. If they did not look at me, I would probably presumed they were heavily involved in watching the play.

In discussions on this board, I perfectly realize that there is discrepancies in what some leagues and organizations ask of some umpires. Different organizations might have to adjust their mechanics to deal with specific concerns. I have just been trying to educate myself on the prevailing opinions between various organizations. Thanks for all who have input.

[AtlUmpSteve]

One mechanic the NCAA manual urges is that the base umpire, on seeing a situation and deciding it is a "no call", should give a "safe" signal. If I see that as PU, I am poaching if I now rule; if BU makes eye contact, we can work out quickly if s/he has it or is looking for assistance (most likely, because no signal, either "safe". or "dead ball", or DDB, means s/he saw something, but doesn't have a clear decision because of position). No signal at all, and no eye contact, tells me that BU hasn't even seen the situation to recognize the situation even needs addressing.

Again, delay and read BU, who has primary responsibility; but, make the call if necessary.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Let's be clear; there is a flip side to this. If there is a play at the plate, and PU is (certainly) watching the play develop and makes the call on a bang-bang play ...... Well, if BU thinks he will now come in and call obstruction by the catcher during that play, because any umpire can call obstruction and PU didn't make eye contact, well, someone's not grasping reality. But, if he saw the runner forced to take a wide turn at third by F5, fine.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Remember, Steve was talking NCAA. Back to ASA or Fed.

Let's look at if from this point: Show me where it states an umpire should ignored an observed violation due to "primary" responsibilities defined in Rule 10.

10.1.F Each umpire will have the power to make decisions on violation committed during playing time or during suspension of play.

It would make no sense to ignore a violation.

Coach: Blue, F3 set up near the base and forced my runner to the outside.
Umpire: Yep, she sure did.
Coach: She would have been safe at 2nd if that didn't happen.
Umpire: I believe you are correct, Coach.
Coach: Then why didn't you make the obstruction call?
Umpire: Not my responsibility, Coach.

I think I can safely say that just became a protestable situation with a protest being acknowledged and upheld.

The only think prettier on a ball field than seeing two umpires simultaneously give a DDB signal for OBS, is seeing three umpires do it.