Catcher Standing on Plate.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by youngump

So in addition to the questions, from the OP it looks like we should have seen an obstruction call here. But I'm not sure I'm comfortable with how this one works. An obstructed runner still needs to touch the base and has no protection for a missed base? So supposing the runner doesn't get the base because of obstruction and leaves the field thinking they did get it, they enjoy no protection from being appealed out in this situation?
Even though the runner may have thought they got the very small piece of home that the catcher wasn't obstructing?
--Ben.

Correct. It is no different from an unobstructed runner thinking they got the edge of the plate, but missed it. ASA 8-5-B says, in part,

Obstructed runners are required to touch all bases in proper order.

[greymule]

Yes, obstructed runners have to touch the bases. But I thought that if the OBS caused the runner to miss the base, it was a different story. The OP seems to describe such a case.

[bkbjones]

Was obstruction called? by that, I mean did you have a delayed dead ball followed by a dead ball, to give the obstructed runner the opportunity to touch the base she missed due to the obstruction. Failing that, you have now given full and unfair advantage to the defense -- in my opinion.

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by bkbjones

Was obstruction called? by that, I mean did you have a delayed dead ball followed by a dead ball, to give the obstructed runner the opportunity to touch the base she missed due to the obstruction.

John - mechanically, are you going to do that any different than you would at first, second, or third? Meaning, when I have obstruction, I give the DDB, wait for the play to end, kill it, announce obstruction and announce that the runner is awarded a base (if it applies). At the plate, if I do that, I can honestly see the runner getting excited and being congratulated by her team mates. So, do we leave it up to the coach to inform his runner to touch the awarded plate? Or, do we say/do something different?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by bkbjones

Was obstruction called? by that, I mean did you have a delayed dead ball followed by a dead ball, to give the obstructed runner the opportunity to touch the base she missed due to the obstruction. Failing that, you have now given full and unfair advantage to the defense -- in my opinion.

Take the OP situation. When would you call the ball dead?

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Take the OP situation. When would you call the ball dead?

Which is why I posed the question...

[WestMichBlue]

This issue intrigues me as it raises the question: "Are you going to call the book literally? Or by the spirit of the law?"

R1 coming home, F2 blocks the plate, R1 slides wide, PU's arm out and says "obstruction," R1 misses plate, F2 receives ball.

Sit 1: F2 dives and tags R1; PU calls dead ball, awards R1 home on obstruction.

Sit 2: F2 looks at PU and says, "she missed the plate," then tags R1. PU honors the appeal (which is an exception to the obstruction rules), and calls R1 out.

Can anyone find a rule that supports allowing a runner free access to return to touch a base missed due to obstruction, before honoring a missed base appeal?


WMB

[Bluefoot]

What if the PU calls OBS after the play is dead (either on his own, or after conferring with FU, for example) and after the BR entered team area? Do you then let the BR come out and complete her awarded baserunning, since it was the PU's failure to call OBS during live ball play that put the BR in jeopardy from completing her baserunning?

[tmielke]

Originally Posted by WestMichBlue

R1 coming home, F2 blocks the plate, R1 slides wide, PU's arm out and says "obstruction," R1 misses plate, F2 receives ball.

Sit 1: F2 dives and tags R1; PU calls dead ball, awards R1 home on obstruction.

Sit 2: F2 looks at PU and says, "she missed the plate," then tags R1. PU honors the appeal (which is an exception to the obstruction rules), and calls R1 out.

WMB

In situation 2, if she missed the plate due to the obstruction, I would award home. Situation 1 is easy.

In the situation in the OP I would keep the obstruction/DDB signal on until she stopped trying to touch home. Then I would have a missed base and possible appeal. I think that this goes with the intent of the rules.

If the runner was tagged before touching the plate, while still attempting to touch the plate, after the the DDB sigal, then I kill the play and award bases.

Comments?

[scroobs]

Originally Posted by WestMichBlue

Can anyone find a rule that supports allowing a runner free access to return to touch a base missed due to obstruction, before honoring a missed base appeal?


WMB

ASA

RS #1,C,1

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by WestMichBlue

This issue intrigues me as it raises the question: "Are you going to call the book literally? Or by the spirit of the law?"

R1 coming home, F2 blocks the plate, R1 slides wide, PU's arm out and says "obstruction," R1 misses plate, F2 receives ball.

Sit 1: F2 dives and tags R1; PU calls dead ball, awards R1 home on obstruction.

Sit 2: F2 looks at PU and says, "she missed the plate," then tags R1. PU honors the appeal (which is an exception to the obstruction rules), and calls R1 out.

Can anyone find a rule that supports allowing a runner free access to return to touch a base missed due to obstruction, before honoring a missed base appeal?


WMB

In sit 2, if R1 is heading toward the dugout, I'd honor the appeal. If R1 is attempting to get back to the plate, this is still part of the effect of the obstruction, and I would not honor the live ball appeal. I don't have sound rules basis for that last one, but it seems right.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by greymule

Yes, obstructed runners have to touch the bases. But I thought that if the OBS caused the runner to miss the base, it was a different story. The OP seems to describe such a case.

I think gm is saying the runner would have reached home (ITUJ) if not obstructed.
Isn't this the same as a runner tagged between the point of OBS and the next base or returning to the previous base because of being OBS and then being awarded the attempted base?

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

I think gm is saying the runner would have reached home (ITUJ) if not obstructed.
Isn't this the same as a runner tagged between the point of OBS and the next base or returning to the previous base because of being OBS and then being awarded the attempted base?

Yes, but they still have to touch the base. If it was any base other than the plate, it is obvious, since they are going to go stand on the next base. This makes the plate a little unique.

[Skahtboi]

Why do all the good arguments on here occur either when I am at lunch, asleep, or working? (I can hear the cracks about sleep and working already.)

[Dukat]

Originally Posted by MNBlue

Yes, but they still have to touch the base. If it was any base other than the plate, it is obvious, since they are going to go stand on the next base. This makes the plate a little unique.

A little unique but not much in so that the next stop is the dugout. They had all the time from the point of obstruction till they touch the DBT in the dugout to finish their baserunning duties.