F2 drops ball on tag while blocking plate

[DTQ_Blue]

Tourney yesterday. On play at plate, F2 gets the ball ahead of runner. She legally blocks plate, runner slides tag is made and runner's momentum causes F2 to drop the ball. F2, having gone to her knees to make the initial tag attempt is now on the ground blocking the plate with the ball easily within her reach on the ground. The runner quickly (and smartly) reaches around F2 and touches the plate just before F2 can pick up the ball and tag her. So I have "safe."

I asked my partner after the game if he thought this would be OBS if it were the other way around and F2 had tagged the runner before the touch. He said that is considered a trainwreck and would not have been OBS.

I'm not sure I agree, but would like to hear other opinions.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by DTQ_Blue

...I asked my partner after the game if he thought this would be OBS if it were the other way around and F2 had tagged the runner before the touch. ...

At the point F2 lost possession of the ball, she can no longer legally impede the runner. If she did that, that is obstruction, whether she was able to tag the runner or not.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by DTQ_Blue

Tourney yesterday. On play at plate, F2 gets the ball ahead of runner. She legally blocks plate, runner slides tag is made and runner's momentum causes F2 to drop the ball. F2, having gone to her knees to make the initial tag attempt is now on the ground blocking the plate with the ball easily within her reach on the ground. The runner quickly (and smartly) reaches around F2 and touches the plate just before F2 can pick up the ball and tag her. So I have "safe."

I asked my partner after the game if he thought this would be OBS if it were the other way around and F2 had tagged the runner before the touch. He said that is considered a trainwreck and would not have been OBS.

I'm not sure I agree, but would like to hear other opinions.

I would say yes as long as the runner was actually impeded. IOW, the runner would have to make an effort to reach the plate AFTER the ball came loose.

[MGKBLUE]

The slightest attempt by the runner to get to home plate, I have OBS.

[wadeintothem]

Make no call on this, life is good.

So stand fast, make no call.. if there is the scramble, let it play out, as you did.

Get goofy and start calling OBS on this play and something goes crappy.. and there is hell to pay.

I have no call. He who gets to the plate/gets the out first wins.

If something happens that is bad, say Catcher holds runner or something weird, you can always throw the arm out.

Let them play ball.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Make no call on this, life is good.

So stand fast, make no call.. if there is the scramble, let it play out, as you did.

Get goofy and start calling OBS on this play and something goes crappy.. and there is hell to pay.

I have no call. He who gets to the plate/gets the out first wins.

If something happens that is bad, say Catcher holds runner or something weird, you can always throw the arm out.

Let them play ball.

Amen Brother Wade. I can take the hell that is due on a controversial call but calling OBS on this...not good. Both players have a right to be where they are.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Dholloway1962

Amen Brother Wade. ...Both players have a right to be where they are.

True, as far as it goes, but blocking the base with possession of the ball carries with it the risk that possesion will be lost due to legal contact, leaving the defender still blocking the base, but now without possession of the ball. If the defender persists in impeding the runner to, for example, give her time to retrieve the ball and make the tag, that is obstruction, whether you two are willing to make the call or not.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Dakota

True, as far as it goes, but blocking the base with possession of the ball carries with it the risk that possesion will be lost due to legal contact, leaving the defender still blocking the base, but now without possession of the ball. If the defender persists in impeding the runner to, for example, give her time to retrieve the ball and make the tag, that is obstruction, whether you two are willing to make the call or not.

Very true.

And the umpire this weekend who scored the only run in a game on the IP for pitcher licking her fingers and then touching the ball was correct too.

And the umpires who call IP from C.. great guys.

And the umpires who constantly stop the game to tuck shirts and to remove bobby pins. Very fun.

Its very fun to work games with your ilk Dakota. The players enjoy it too.



I know OBS when I see it.

This one I can be patient on the ole arm and see what happens.

[MichaelVA2000]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Very true.

And the umpire this weekend who scored the only run in a game on the IP for pitcher licking her fingers and then touching the ball was correct too.

True if she didn't wipe the fingers before delivering the pitch

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

And the umpires who call IP from C.. great guys.

And the umpires who constantly stop the game to tuck shirts and to remove bobby pins. Very fun.

I want the pitcher to have her shirt tucked if it's distracting and if the batter's shirt not being tucked is hanging over the plate as she swings, I want that shirt tucked also.

Why would an umpire constantly stop the game over metal bobby pins? For the first offense have the player remove them and issue a team warning. If it happens again, restrict (if the rule set allows) to the bench or eject the offender. Usually a team warning stops this issue from reoccurring.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Very true.

And the umpire this weekend who scored the only run in a game on the IP for pitcher licking her fingers and then touching the ball was correct too.

And the umpires who call IP from C.. great guys.

And the umpires who constantly stop the game to tuck shirts and to remove bobby pins. Very fun.

Its very fun to work games with your ilk Dakota. The players enjoy it too.



I know OBS when I see it.

This one I can be patient on the ole arm and see what happens.

IMO, the licking / not wiping rule should be removed. It is silly. I am also not the fashion police. None of your examples apply to my "ilk." As to knowing obstruction when you see it, maybe so, but you seem to be saying you won't call it in a situation where a legal slide knocked the ball loose and F2 prevented the runner from touching the plate until she could retrieve the ball and make the tag. Why won't you call this, exactly?

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by Dakota

True, as far as it goes, but blocking the base with possession of the ball carries with it the risk that possesion will be lost due to legal contact, leaving the defender still blocking the base, but now without possession of the ball. If the defender persists in impeding the runner to, for example, give her time to retrieve the ball and make the tag, that is obstruction, whether you two are willing to make the call or not.

I see ur point so don't think I'm being argumentative. In the truest sense of the black and white of the written rule you are correct. But, how can we expect the fielder to immediately disappear after losing the possession of the ball? Common sense dictates that when you have a play, such as in the OP, there is a possibility of the ball coming loose. The fielder has the right to get to the ball as much as the runner getting to the plate. The fielder has to do something. If they move they OBS, if they don't move they OBS.

I know I'm going to be crucified for this, but I'm writing it.....I don't think this is what the writers of the rule meant when they rewrote that rule.

Most of what I read in the OBS deals with before a play and at the time of the play, not immediately after a play (please let me know if I misread something that covers this).

Another example would be the same play at the play and this happening....runner slides in and contacts the pitcher (all legal). The tag made before runner gets to plate. Ball for a split second is bobbled, straight up in the air, and then again controlled by the pitcher, right back into glove (all this seen by umpire). Runner never got to plate and pitcher never moved glove off runner. At the time of the bobble do you have OBS?

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Dakota

IMO, the licking / not wiping rule should be removed. It is silly. I am also not the fashion police. None of your examples apply to my "ilk." As to knowing obstruction when you see it, maybe so, but you seem to be saying you won't call it in a situation where a legal slide knocked the ball loose and F2 prevented the runner from touching the plate until she could retrieve the ball and make the tag. Why won't you call this, exactly?

I stand corrected, Its michael VA's ilk

I may call it, but another POV on this play is to be patient on it. If it plays out well.. let it go. Its a good play at the plate, let em play. Dont be quick on the draw on this one.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by MichaelVA2000

True if she didn't wipe the fingers before delivering the pitch



I want the pitcher to have her shirt tucked if it's distracting and if the batter's shirt not being tucked is hanging over the plate as she swings, I want that shirt tucked also.

Why would an umpire constantly stop the game over metal bobby pins? For the first offense have the player remove them and issue a team warning. If it happens again, restrict (if the rule set allows) to the bench or eject the offender. Usually a team warning stops this issue from reoccurring.

it defies response.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Dholloway1962

I see ur point so don't think I'm being argumentative. In the truest sense of the black and white of the written rule you are correct. But, how can we expect the fielder to immediately disappear after losing the possession of the ball? Common sense dictates that when you have a play, such as in the OP, there is a possibility of the ball coming loose. The fielder has the right to get to the ball as much as the runner getting to the plate. The fielder has to do something. If they move they OBS, if they don't move they OBS.

I know I'm going to be crucified for this, but I'm writing it.....I don't think this is what the writers of the rule meant when they rewrote that rule.

Most of what I read in the OBS deals with before a play and at the time of the play, not immediately after a play (please let me know if I misread something that covers this).

Another example would be the same play at the play and this happening....runner slides in and contacts the pitcher (all legal). The tag made before runner gets to plate. Ball for a split second is bobbled, straight up in the air, and then again controlled by the pitcher, right back into glove (all this seen by umpire). Runner never got to plate and pitcher never moved glove off runner. At the time of the bobble do you have OBS?

OBS requires impeding the runner, not merely losing possession of the ball. In the OP, the runner is "quickly and smartly" attempting to touch the plate. If the catcher impeded this action without the ball, that is obstruction. If by so impeding the runner, the catcher gave herself time to retrieve the ball she lost possession of, and you do not call this because... why was that again? ... you have not made the correct call, in my view.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

IMO, the licking / not wiping rule should be removed. It is silly. I am also not the fashion police. None of your examples apply to my "ilk." As to knowing obstruction when you see it, maybe so, but you seem to be saying you won't call it in a situation where a legal slide knocked the ball loose and F2 prevented the runner from touching the plate until she could retrieve the ball and make the tag. Why won't you call this, exactly?

Part of being an umpire is making the tough calls. If you are afraid to make the call because may have to face a little adversity, you picked the wrong vocation.

If you will not make the black and white call because you think you know better than those which put the rules into place, then you are failing to fulfill your contract.

Or maybe you just lack the intestinal fortitude.

As it was previously noted, the runner must actually be obstructed. That means that the runner must actually be trying to advance. And if that was your daughter on the ground fighting to get to the plate with the catcher holding her back, you would be screaming for the umpire's head.