Diff of Opinion - Obstruction Jurisdiction

[SC Ump]

From previous posts, it seems that my opinion on who has the right to call obstruction/interference is different than most, if not all, others here. I would like some additional information on this, even though this might not be the first time I have to accept that I am right and everyone else is wrong (he says tongue-in-cheek.)

AtlUmpSteve posted some very good information from several different rules books and umpiring manuals concerning communicating with your partner. It got me thinking that I have heard many folks state that they think it is proper for any umpire to call obstruction and interference anytime they see it. However, I have not seen that as part of official publications.

Does anyone have examples?

[mcrowder]

Not sure what the difference of opinion is, as you didn't say...

But ANY umpire can call ANY obstruction he sees on the field. It's not poaching if the OBS you see happens to be closer to your partner(s) than you - they may have responsibilities causing them to look elsewhere momentarily.

[LIBLUE]

Imho I would never call obstruction if my partner was closer and was looking directly at the play. That's showing him up. Now if he came to me between innings and asked me for my opinion I'd tell him.

[CecilOne]

It's one of the things I watch for as PU when there is no play at the plate, especially while the BU is getting to an inside position.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by LIBLUE

Imho I would never call obstruction if my partner was closer and was looking directly at the play. That's showing him up. Now if he came to me between innings and asked me for my opinion I'd tell him.

No, it's not. This is not like football where it's taboo to "fish in the other guy's pond". There are calls that specifically belong to certain umpires. OBS (and INT) is not one of them. Often, even if BU is closer, his focus is on what is about to happen. Finding the ball, hustling to position, setting up for the play at a base, etc. Much of the time, OBS is behind that focus. Think about it... as BU, are you watching the baserunner 100% of the time? Hope not. And since you aren't, it's entirely possible that OBS occurs while your focus is elsewhere. And also - with PU responsible for the touch of first base in some cases, PU is focused on the most common spot for OBS, while BU is elsewhere.

If someone calls OBS in "your area" as BU, you should NOT consider this showing him up. There is a reason clinics tell you that OBS is everyone's call. Don't be offended if your partner understands that.

[Andy]

I agree that OBS or INT can be called by any umpire on the field.

What I will do if in the situation where my partner is closer to the play than I am and I am sure I have the violation, is wait a split second for my partner to signal and/or call the violation. If my partner does nothing after that split second, I will take the appropriate actions.

Here's a play I had some time ago: I am PU, R1 on second, BU partner in C position. Ball is hit over F6's head into left field. BU starts to break inside. As BU is moving in, R1 collides with F6 in front of and a few steps to the side of BU. I am following the ball into the outfield, but clearly see the collision. BU makes no signal, so I go out with the left arm DDB. At the conclusion of the play, appropriate bases are awarded and we continue.

I ask my partner later why he did not signal anything, he said that he was focused on getting inside and did not see the collision.

[SC Ump]

Originally Posted by Andy

I agree that OBS or INT can be called by any umpire on the field.

That's the difference of opinion I was talking of. I have always believed that the call belongs to the umpire responsible for that player at that time.

I was wondering if anyone has references in umpire manuals or rule books of any organization that state any umpire seeing the action should make the call, not just the one responsible for the runner.

(For the equation to football, I've only done that for a year. I don't think that is a free-for-all, either. In my football position of umpire, I would not call roughing the passer or a face mask out on the wings.)

[mcrowder]

If work football as well, and know from whence I speak when I say that it's a completely different animal.

In football, you have an area of responsibility and are responsible for everything that happens in that area. There is a LITTLE bit of overlap (holding in the interior, sometimes illegal man downfield, interference in the gaps, etc), but most calls belong to one guy.

In baseball/softball, it's not as cut and dried. There are some calls that "belong" to one umpire, and some that don't. OBS and INT fall into the "don't" category. I doubt it's mentioned in a book, but it is definitely discussed in clinics, especially on-field clinics.

And there's a reason for it. BU has multiple responsibilities and will NEVER be able to constantly watch a runner, or he fails in his other responsibilities (especially with multiple runners). PU has to get into a position as well, but is nearly always facing the field, and has more of a full view of the possible OBS/INT's.

[SC Ump]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

In baseball/softball, it's not as cut and dried. There are some calls that "belong" to one umpire, and some that don't.

I've been doing softball since '89, but football only a year. Perhaps that is why I see softball as being cut and dried, where football I view differently. In softball, I believe that each umpire is responsible for a specific runner or situation. Even during a run down/pickle/hot-box, there is protocol.

I realize things get "taught at clinics". You would not believe what I have been "taught at clinics." I was hoping to find something in writing.

In the parlance of my good buddies from Lugoff arguing calls from the stands last night, I'm just looking for some "meat to go with 'em 'taters."

[AtlUmpSteve]

I can't see it addressed in ASA or NFHS umpire manuals. It is addressed in the NCAA Manual. Please remember that NCAA still allows many more "wrecks" than ASA or NFHS, with "about to receive", and primarily assumes three umpire mechanics.

"In most cases an umpire is responsible for ruling on the interference, obstruction, or contact involving the runner coming at him/her. Proximity of the action to another umpire, or the responsible umpire being involved in a play on another runner, could dictate a different umpire taking the call.

Before calling or signalling an interference, obstruction or wreck that is not in your calling area or that is not your responsibility, obtain eye contact with the responsible umpire. If he/she has the play, then defer judgment on the call to him/her. If his/her attention is elsewhere, then take the call. Be assertive and aggressive and prepared to explain your judgment."

Left unsaid, but I believe should be assumed, is that many times your partner will not make eye contact because they totally missed the reason for the call to begin with. If no eye contact is made, it should be considered that the attention was elsewhere, and a call should be made, if appropriate.

[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.