You make the call

[mick]

Originally Posted by debeau

If they couldnt touch the bag in the normal legal running of the bases.
The same as you would judge if it was obstruction , then they dont have to touch that base .

Seems to me the BR must make some adjudged attempt to touch. That is, if F3 is in the base line (a few feet from 1st] and blocking 1st, the BR should not be allowed to merely cut the corner and head to 2nd without making an attempt to touch 1st.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Because your first answer was, "Once the ball becomes dead for any reason, I'm hesitating to see any reaction by the runner (as to return to touch the missed base). If none, I accept the appeal and rule the OBS out." I didn't read that you would announce the award in that case, which was my main point of contention with your statement.

In the OP, there would have been no award to announce as the OBS was dropped (IMO based on the scenario) when the runner passed 2B.

[debeau]

Mick
It is essential to state here that OBST must still be judged .
If in your scenario you judge the runner was not hindered then you dont have OBST .
In your scenario I wouldnt have OBST either .

[mick]

Originally Posted by debeau

Mick
It is essential to state here that OBST must still be judged .
If in your scenario you judge the runner was not hindered then you dont have OBST .
In your scenario I wouldnt have OBST either .

I was just trying to understand the rule:

Originally Posted by debeau

ISF
New rule last year
The runner is exempted from touching the base if prevented from doing so by obstruction .

Do you have any more information? Are there any cases given?

[ukumpire]

Originally Posted by debeau

ISF
New rule last year
The runner is exempted from touching the base if prevented from doing so by obstruction .

Not much difference between ISF and ASA Rule Book, but this is one of the few. The BR was Obs from touching 1st and proceded to 2nd therefore if only reaching 2nd - No Appeal on missing 1st, the Obs protects this happening. If the BR does not break stride and continues to 3rd and gets tagged within reason, or in the Umpires judgement would of made 3rd, then still Safe. Regardless of missing 1st, The Obs ruled protects the runner, the overthrow possibly would of happened regardless.

Bebeau so few ISF umpires on this great site - Who are you?

[debeau]

Mick
To tell you the truth I havnt had to deal with it .
Hell , the players are still trying to get their head around the original obstruction rule change .
I generally umpire high level mens ball so they are pushing the boundaries anyway .
Had a 13 year old tourney in April and the coaches were still using rules and mind sets from early 90's . They were devestated when we said there were major changes in 2002 and another 64 changes in 2006 .

UKumpire
I umpire in New Zealand
I come on to this site for fun discussion and many plays and relate them to ISF .
Many rules are the same but our interretations are sometimes different .
Obstruction is one of the major ones , ie how we deal with an obstructed runner .
How is the UK , weather warm ?
Here in New Zealand , just hit winter with temps still getting to late twenties(celcius ) .
1st big frost of the year Monday and went down to 0 but thats about as cold as it gets .
Expecting a Southerly storm on Friday and Saturday with snow to low levels .
we generally get snow 2 or 3 times a year but it only sits around for a few days where I live .
To tell you the truth we could have winter softball if we had the numbers .
A sunny winter day still gets to 15degrees and is often warmer than those early summer easterly winds .

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Define "prevented"...

Unless the defender picked up the bag and tossed it into the dugout, not much would "prevent" retouching the bag.

And then the fielder could be a minor league manager.

[ukumpire]

Originally Posted by mick

I was just trying to understand the rule:

Do you have any more information? Are there any cases given?

Had one this weekend, abet Slowpitch, but same interpretation of Ruling.
2nd Baseman was strandling the bag, runner came inside, as close as possible to the base, but was blocked from touching the bag, to go to third and got to 3rd. D appealed missed 2nd, but I had already spotted this and had a DDB. Explained that due to obstruction of the bag by the 2nd baseperson OBS ruled. Appeal Denied

[BCCanuck]

Mick - Softball Canada uses the ISF wording for obstruction.This is from their casebook: (ignore the superfluous use of the word deliberately)

292. There is a runner at 2nd when the batter hits a pitched ball for a single to center field. R2 is deliberately obstructed and unable to touch 3rd and continues on to home plate where he scores. After all play has stopped the defence makes a dead ball appeal on R2 for missing 3rd.
RULING: The umpires shall award R2 both 3rd and home due to the deliberate obstruction. R2 is not required to touch 3rd base due to the obstruction. If a runner can not touch a base because s/he was obstructed s/he cannot be called out on a subsequent appeal.

Note :Softball Canada refers to runners according to the base on which they started.

[mick]

Originally Posted by BCCanuck

Mick - Softball Canada uses the ISF wording for obstruction.This is from their casebook: (ignore the superfluous use of the word deliberately)

292. There is a runner at 2nd when the batter hits a pitched ball for a single to center field. R2 is deliberately obstructed and unable to touch 3rd and continues on to home plate where he scores. After all play has stopped the defence makes a dead ball appeal on R2 for missing 3rd.
RULING: The umpires shall award R2 both 3rd and home due to the deliberate obstruction. R2 is not required to touch 3rd base due to the obstruction. If a runner can not touch a base because s/he was obstructed s/he cannot be called out on a subsequent appeal.

Note :Softball Canada refers to runners according to the base on which they started.

Thanks eh, BCCanuck. I appreciate that.

In attempting to understand why and when the runner can *forget* the touch (and realizing that the runner doesn't have to wrestle the fielder for the bag) I am puzzled as to:

• How much of an effort does the runner need to make to touch the bag
  • some ?
  • none ?
• How close to the bag does the obstruction have to occur before the runner may just run around with no effort.
  • inches, centimeters?
  • feet, meters ?
• What if the fielder moves out of the way late enough to call obstruction, but early enough to make the bag available.

I think the intent the rule is fair enough, I am just looking at how to judge it.
I'm looking for some kind of measurement (and not to just leave it to the whim of the runner), like when the runner is forced to break stride two strides from the bag, or 3 seconds, ... or somthin'.

[ukumpire]

I am just looking at how to judge it.
I'm looking for some kind of measurement (and not to just leave it to the whim of the runner), like when the runner is forced to break stride two strides from the bag, or 3 seconds, ... or somthin'.[/QUOTE]

How many Judgement calls do you make in a game? This is all it is, a judgement call, there is no way to measure a judgement call, it's all up in our head, thats why we are the Blu's and they are the players.

If you think the runner is making a play for the bag but cannot get to it and goes around or just inside it - you got an OBS: If you think the runner is taking the 'Piss' with missing the bag - You got an OUT

It's Your Call, No one Else's ...

[mick]

Originally Posted by ukumpire

If you think the runner is making a play for the bag but cannot get to it and goes around or just inside it - you got an OBS: If you think the runner is taking the 'Piss' with missing the bag - You got an OUT

It's Your Call, No one Else's ...

Well, I guess I can do that, absent any explanation of a, seemingly, poorly written rule.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by BCCanuck

If a runner can not touch a base because s/he was obstructed s/he cannot be called out on a subsequent appeal.

ASA-speak for the same thought: "If a runner cannot touch a base because they were obstructed they cannot be called out on a subsequent appeal."

Put down your PC neo-Grammar Guide and read the above two sentences. Which is better English?