A fun one I had not seen before...
 

Last night - 14U ASA

BR hits a dribbler down the 1B line that will surely go foul. She just stands in the box. F2 heads for the ball. F1 heads for the ball. The coaches start yelling, "RUN! RUN!", so the BR starts to run.

The ball stays fair and is just inside the foul line. F2 stops on the line and allows F1 to field the ball. BR has to run around F2 (on the foul side) where F1 is waiting.

> BR was tagged by F1.
> BR committed a "base runner error" for just standing in the box.
> BR had no chance of making 1B...

... except for the obstruction on F2.

Coaches: "Oh, I can't believe you called that." "There's no way that's the rule." "What kind of stuff are you trying to pull."

Confession - I did not call the obstruction right away. After it all happened, I started to turn around back to my PU position and then realized what I had just seen. I guess it was a bit unusually because F2 rarely gets ahead of BR on the base path.

Did BR have a chance at 1st w/o the OBS or did you apply the "between the bases" protection?

I do not feel BR would have safely reached 1B if OBS had not been called.

Call the out, no OBS. The OBS had no affect on the play, hence the BR wasn't impeded.

Not available, but pretty sure there is a case play which would support this ruling. The CB play, I believed involved a runner OBS when forced off 2B, but would never had reached third regardless of the OBS.

no obstruction, you're out for being dumb. game on. why start more than ya have to?

peace.

What am I missing here? F2 clearly was guilty of OBS between HP and 1B. Give the offense the option of taking the play, or bring BR back to bat.

Why would you bring them back to bat? When does the offense get an option on OBS, except by the catcher?

On the OP, why wasn't the runner in the running lane? If she's in fair ball territory and then moves to foul ball territory and gets tagged - I'm good with that. From what I've read, I have an out.

The play happened prior to the runner lane. Pitcher fielding the ball was 15 feet from home, catcher was about 12 feet from home. Catcher was straddling the foul line. Pitcher fielded the ball on the fair side of the line and when BR moved around catcher to avoid contact, pitcher then stepped to the foul side of the foul line and applied the tag.

I retract the part of the option, but should have written that any runners who might have been on base and advanced on the play will stand, but return the batter to bat for OBS, if in the judgement of umpire the runner would have been out even without the OBS, or award 1B if the OBS caused the runner to be OUT.

I am not aware of any rule that excludes OBS between home and 1B. Therefore return BR to bat as there is nothing else to do at home plate.

In OBS, the basepath is chosen by the runner. I do not see how the 3 foot lane would have any bearing on the ruling - unless BR INT.

The 3 foot lane only applies to the BR interfering with a play at 1st, nothing else.

It does seem that "BR has to run around F2 (on the foul side)" is impeding the runner. Then the effect must be judged. At 12 feet from home, with the fielder already having the ball, I agree that the BR would not reach 1st safely.
However, the "between the bases" protection is another issue, and that would make it seem that the BR is awarded 1st, because there is nothing in the rules about returning to bat.

Whoa! Since when do we start judging the end of the play as to whether or not to call obstruction? I thought that our only judgment was how far to protect the obstructed runner.

I closest I found is Play 8.6.5 which has R1 on 2B and R2 on 1B, ground ball to F1, who throws to F5 for easy force out at 3B. Except that R1 was obstructed by F6! Now there is no way R1 is not out at 3B - but she was obstructed - and you have to call it! Can't send her back to 2B because R2 is there, and B-R is now at 1B. Per the ASA Casebook, you send R1 to 3B!

I see that as identical to our OP. You have to call obstruction. As the batter has ended her time at bat and is now a B-R when obstruction occured, I don't see sending her back to bat again. As dumb as it may look, I think that you have to send the B-R to 1B.

WMB

[QUOTE=SC Ump]Last night - 14U ASA



The ball stays fair and is just inside the foul line. F2 stops on the line and allows F1 to field the ball. BR has to run around F2 (on the foul side) where F1 is waiting.
QUOTE]


I can't see OBS due to this statement. It appears that F1 and F2 were both legally in the act of fielding a batted ball. F2 ceded the play to F1 (or was just beat out), but she can't then just vanish.

The act of fielding the batted ball is one of the exceptions to OBS. Of course only one player can eventually field the ball, but two players can be in the act of fielding at the same time. Having "seen" the play from this information, I have an out.

It is my understanding that in NFHS and ASA only one fielder can be judged to be fielding the ball. Only this fielder is protected against interference. All other fielders would not be in the act of fielding the ball and thus would not be allowed to be in the runner's path. (Sorry for the previously unclear wording.)

All other fielders would not be in the act of fielding the ball and thus could not obstruct.

Huh? Are you saying that any fielder not fielding the ball is safe from obstruction? So if a BR were rounding 1b with a ball in the outfiled, F3 can get in the way of the BR and not be giulty of obstruction because F3 was not in the act of fielding a ball? I admit, I am not a umpire, bur this seems to be a definite error.

me too

But "All other fielders would not be in the act of fielding the ball and thus could not obstruct" might be a typo.

Irish, I think you need to produce this caseplay, as it flies in the face of all other interpretations of OBS I've ever seen. I can't find it myself, and only find the one referenced above that directs us to call OBS and award 3rd base.

We have never been told to judge whether the runner would have reached the base after the base where the obstruction occurs. By rule, OBS should be called on F2 (she is not protected due to fielding a batted ball immediately after she decides not to field the batted ball, and in any case, this exemption from OBS can only be applied to one fielder - F1 in this case). BR goes to 1st.

As to the "she would never have made it to first" contingent, how do you know. Absent the OBS, perhaps F1 is unable to tag and has to throw it - and you never know what will happen on a throw.

And Tom - where in the world are you getting the idea that sending the BR back to the plate is a viable option in ANY scenario. There is no OBS award that allows you to do this, and I've never even heard of someone trying to apply such a ruling.

Guys, this is simple cut-and-dried obstruction - BR to first, all others advance a base.

This statement in the OP tells me the basepath of the BR was impeded by F2. Since F2 didn't field the ball, F2 does not receive the protection that a fielder in the act of fielding receives, so F2 is guilty of obstruction. Since I don't know of any rule that allows me to bring the BR back to bat after being obstructed, I am going to award the BR first base.

Let's change the OP just a little. Bunted ball up the first base line, F1 comes over to attempt to field the ball, but is late and the ball rolls to F3 who is standing closer to the base than the BR who had to run around F1 after F1 didn't field the ball because F1 was standing in the basepath of the BR. I still have obstruction and award the BR first base and bump all forced runners.

I agree with Mike Crowder. Text book obstruction.

Who is Tom? The only "Tom" I see agrees.

I think (but am now no longer positive) that Tcanizzo is a Tom. It is Mr. Canizzo to whom I was responding.

EDIT: (I see now that he's a Tony. My bad).

Here is your slap on the wrist. "SMACK" :D

I agree and maybe I've got it backwards. I thought we had discussed this before on a play where something goofy happened a few steps off 2B on an all too obvious out on the force at 3B.

I've got to look around and see what I'm thinking of here.

What about this?
 

I know by rule that a fielder can not be called for obstruction while in the act of fielding a ball. However, I believe this protection can be abused. Here's the scenario I'm referring to. B1 is the lead off batter. B1 lays down a bunt in front of home plate. B1 is a right handed batter so any path to first is going to put her between the ball and the catcher. If the catcher was a little slow in reacting and trips the batter-runner at home plate by rule I can't call obstruction. She was in the act of fielding and I've heard on this board that the runner is obligated to avoid contacting the fielder. I'd like to call obstruction, but I can't. It just seems to me that we should be able to penalize the defense here.

This is HTBT to the extreme and even then it is difficult.

First, the umpire must determine that the C is the primary defender with an actual chance to field the ball. As long as both players are doing what they're supposed to do, it's nothing. If either does something that is directed toward the opposing player (pushing, kicking, anything not involved with running or fielding the ball), then the umpire needs to make a decision whether it is OBS or INT.

So in other words, if they run into each other it's just a collision and we let them play through it. But if one or the other gains an advantage by excessive pushing or shoving, them we penalize the offending party (either the defense and call obstruction or the offense and call interference)? I can live with that! That seems to be the most equitable. Where's the rule reference for this interpretation?

IM didn't mention "gains an advantage", just excess actions.

Seems to me the C is coming from behind the BR and is farther from the ball and so bears the greater responsibility. It easily could be OBS, if the BR does nothing illegal and is impeded.

ASA Umpire Manual, Page 230, Collision is my basis. I use the unnecessary contact (push by either) because I think that is more likely to happen during this play than either actually changing direction to draw a violation. Yet either is an act that indicates the player's priority changed from just doing their job and advancing through the play to actually playing off the opposing player.