Obstruction - One More Time
 

ASA Game.

R2 on third, one out. B2 hit the ball to the infield and R2 takes off for home.

The throw to home beats R2 with F2 blocking the plate. No problem.

R2 to slides into F2. In the process of tagging R2, F2 losses control of the ball the rolls next to R2. F2 continues to block the plate while retrieving the ball and tags R2 out.

My call, obstruction on F2 when she losses control of the ball and continues to block the plate.

Reasoning: F2 after losing control of the ball, impended R2 from advancing to home plate. Therefore, as R2 was impended and F2 did not have possession of the ball, I have obstruction.

Correct call?

I hate to say it, but it's another "HTBT." If the picture I've got from your post is accurate, it sounds like it could have been OBS. If a fielder, not in possession of the ball, impedes (not impends) the progress of a runner, then you have OBS.

How was F2 blocking the plate while retrieving the ball? Was R1 at a dead stop?

[QUOTE=NCASAUmp]I hate to say it, but it's another "HTBT." If the picture I've got from your post is accurate, it sounds like it could have been OBS. If a fielder, not in possession of the ball, impedes (not impends) the progress of a runner, then you have OBS.

How was F2 blocking the plate while retrieving the ball? Was R1 at a dead stop?[/QUOTE]

F2 was on her knees in front of the plate leaning over the runner to retrieve the ball.

R1 was trying to move F2 out of the way, as best she could, while laying flat on her back.

Then that was obstruction.

Seems we had a sitch similar to this a year or two ago.

Yup. Kinda fits every part of the definition.

HTBT play but from the OP it sounds like obstruction.

Saw this one yesterday:

R1 attempting to steal 2B, F2 throws down, F6 crosses in front of 2B, ball hits the glove, F6 steps in front of the runner, ball falls out, R1 collides with F6 sans ball (it was a lot more fluid than that, but you get the picture; save the drop, one of the best defensive reactions to a stolen base attempt I've seen this year, R1 was caught cold). BU's arm goes out and holds it there until R1 reaches 3B.

After a second's thought, I agreed with the call. Wouldn't have held my arm up that long, I don't think...

I am just getting started so please bear with me. This last situation is a bit confusing. I'm sure I've missed something somewhere.

Since F6 had the ball and was attempting a play on R1 when the ball fell out, why is that OBS? Or, did the ball fall out BEFORE the collision with R1?

OK, with the original post - "In the process of tagging R2, F2 losses control of the ball the rolls next to R2." No obstruction at this point.
"F2 continues to block the plate while retrieving the ball and tags R2 out." - the obstruction is here - the fielder did not have the ball and hindered or impeded the runner.

Now, what is the definition of obstruction? See why it's obstruction now?

Look at Jeffer's play - "R1 attempting to steal 2B, F2 throws down, F6 crosses in front of 2B, ball hits the glove, F6 steps in front of the runner, ball falls out, R1 collides with F6 sans ball (it was a lot more fluid than that, but you get the picture; save the drop, one of the best defensive reactions to a stolen base attempt I've seen this year, R1 was caught cold)."
At the point in time of the collision, did F6 have the ball? Go back to the definition of obstruction you just looked up. See why it is obstruction?

I think I've got it. The first one I understood. Based on the information given, F2 was clearly keeping R2 from getting to the plate while NOT in possession of the ball.

In the second situation, I missed the "sans". So, F6 did NOT have the ball and collided with R1. Clear obstruction.

Have I got it?

If this all happened "fluidly" then I don't see obstruction at all. I think you have a collision. Maybe I'm missing something or maybe it's one of those HTBT things.

OK, I'm new here.....HTBT?

HTBT = Had To Be There

Sounds like you got it.

AND welcome to the board...........:D

Thanks. And thanks for the kind welcome.

Personally, I think you ARE missing something. "Fluidly" is absolutely and totally immaterial. What does matter is that the fielder impeded the runner while not in possession of the ball (ball falls out, R1 collides with F6 sans ball). Filelder was legally there when she had the ball; falls out, and she can no longer be there. And, yes, that she means she must go "poof".

Unless you do not understand that "sans" means WITHOUT.

Now... nearly the exact same play happened last night. Same F2 and F6. Not as good a throw, F6 never had the ball (it did bounce off the tip of her glove). No DDB signal, No OBS called. Runner stays at 2B.

Now... aftering seeing this, I'm rethinking Monday night: The ball fell right in front of 2B. Either F4 or F6 could easily have picked up the ball and thrown R1 out at 3B. Heck F1 probably could have. But with R1 jogging to 3B with BU trailing behind her with the arm out, there just didn't seem to be much point.

I'm still cool with the OBS call, made while the runner was between 1B and 2B, and protection to 2B. But, if F6 had never collided with R1, then R1 would have been a fool to try for 3B. Now, I couldn't hear the BU "award" 3B to R1, but BU holding the arm out while following her to 3B would sure give me (if I were an infielder) pause at trying to throw her out.

I was reading fluidly as more of an instantaneous moment. F6 comes up to make tag and at the last second drops ball then contact occurs. Just because there is contact doesn't always translate into OBS or INT in every situation. Still have some issues with this one but don't mean to say I disagree with the call.

Holding the arm out in the DDB signal only means DDB. The duration of holding the arm out does not (should not) mean anything at all.

ASA RS on Crash Interference, paragraph G:

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">When the ball, runner and the defensive player arrive at the same time and place, and contact is made, the umpire should not invoke the crash rule, interference, or obstruction. This is merely incidental contact, or what some persons commonly call, “a wreck.” </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

And if no one is placed at a disadvantage, I can accept that. What I cannot accept is someone using this as an excuse for not calling OBS when this "wreck" has dropped a runner to the ground, stunned and/or incapacitated in any manner prior to attaining the base.

I agree, Mike. I was responding to Dholloway1962's statement that "Just because there is contact doesn't always translate into OBS or INT in every situation."

I understand, just don't like that "general statement" because it flies in the face of the present OBS rule.