interference or obstruction?
 

R1 on 1st base. B2 hits ball to F4, standing in baseline. F4 has opportunity to tag R1 but decides to toss ball to F6 for force out. Ball reaches F6 in plenty of time for force but R1 in attempting to reach 2nd base runs into F4 without the ball.
I call obstruction on F4. Did I make right call?

Speaking ASA - Sounds a bit HTBT to me. Like the runners, defensive players can't just go "poof" once they throw the ball. F4 had a right to be where she was when she was fielding the ball, as well as when she possessed the ball. Once she threw the ball, unless I see her intentionally trying to hinder the runner, I've got an out.

Speaking ASA

Where was the ball when R1 ran into F4? If in F6's glove, R1 is no longer a runner.

Even if it was an extremely slow toss of the ball, the purpose of OBS is to off-set the affect of the obstruction. Had the OBS not occurred, R1 still would have been out.

Pretty close to Dave, but I don't think I want to use the discussion point with a coach that fielders without the ball can't go poof. Standing in the basepath without possession of the ball and not actively (any more) fielding the ball, and hindering the runner (even unintentionally) is the very definition of obstruction; that conversation could easily lead to a protest that might have to be upheld.

In my conversation, the runner was already out before the apparent obstruction, and retired runners have no rights to continue running unimpeded.

Yeah, I wouldn't phrase it to a coach like that, either, as they'll take it as "if my fielder just threw the ball, I can have them block runners."

Give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile.

Anyway, I still have an out.

Besides, if you turn to Page One of your unofficial umpire's manual, you will note the first sentence reads "When in doubt, get an out." :D

Somewhat more seriously, I do not have obs here as the play is described. If, in the sole judgement of the umpire, there is no frickin way she was going to get to the bag before being put out, there is no obs.

Caveat: It is a judgement call. If the BU rules obs, then it's obs. We might visit about it out back after the game, but it is a judgement call.

Out back behind Ft. Dent?

:( :mad:

Anyone else have a problem with these two statements?

I do.

So what is your problem with those statements? Maybe they could have been more "politically correct" but they are basically stating the same thing that we have been told, if the play would have been an out without the OBS then it remains an out. The classic example of a pop fly to the outfield that is caught in the air for an out, if the BR rounds first and trips over the first baseperson we still got an out....the OBS in that case doesn't let them have 2nd base, they are still out. I see it as the same type of interpretation, agian could have been worded differently so it didnt' seem like they were "making up" a ruling and hiding behind the J card (in my judgement) but I see the validity in their reasoning.

So what would you rule and why??

If these 2 statements are saying that they have an obstructed runner called out between the bases where the OBS occurred, I do too.

Yeah, that's what I'm getting at. While the objective of the OBS rule is to restore things as if the OBS had not taken place, in no way does this ever say that between the bases where the OBS occurred, you let the out stand merely because without OBS, the runner would have been out.

Sorry to hear that, but that's life in the big city.

Of course, these comments were specific to the play at hand. Not much different than OBS on a BR between the plate and 1B on a caught fly ball.

I wasn't aware DE had any big cities... :D

I know your comments were specific to the play at hand, but in general, a runner is protected between the bases where the obs occurred EVEN IF the runner was a certain out.

Yes, and if she were obstructed she would be protected by rule. I certainly have no reason why that rule would not be enforced. sorry I wasn't more clear. I guess I should have realized someone would read far more into it than I intended...arrrgggh:mad:

I undertand, but your you first post confuses me in that it stated that "Had the OBS not occurred, R1 still would have been out.". It either is, or is not, OBS. If it is, I certainly don't need to tell you that the runner cannot be called out. If you meant that you would not have had OBS, then it's a matter of judgement, not rules.

BTW, how many people do live in Wilmington?

I think you are confusing who he said is out. He is saying R1 is protected from the OBS. However, the BR (B2 in the original posting) is not protected since they were not OBS and the OBS had no bearing on their being out.

I don't think so. I see no mention of the BR in the OP or Irish's other than her hitting the ball to F4. Read it again.

F4 made the choice (not to tag and go for the force) and then obstructing (she now has to deal with it)... I have R1 safe at second and the BR (im guessing safe?? at first... unless they threw her out for the force, nothing about it in the OP). conversation goes like this... DC: blue you cant call that? BU: that's obstruction coach...lets play ball. (6 words)

If that is what you are looking for, fine, you got it.

Don't know, don't care especially since I've never lived in Wilmington.

I did misread it...sorry.

Right. You live in the BIG city! :D

Just to be clear, in the OP, it is problematical from the description given whether there even was obstruction (was R1 already retired?; was R1 saved from crash interference by F4 throwing the ball at the last second?...)

But, if there WAS obstruction, it doesn't matter whether R1 was a dead duck. She is now not out, and is placed on 2B (if BR is safe) or back on 1B if BR was put out (again, assuming R1 would not have made 2B had there been no OBS).

No you did not make the right call IMO, and I did not HTBT to know that.

You made a big error and you should do what I do when I make an error, you should beat yourself up over it so hopefully you dont do it again. It truly was a horrible call.

F4 is either fielding a batted ball OR R1 is out. There is no nano second OBS from the moment of release of the throw to the moment of the catch by F6. Thats not the intent of the rules and I'm surprised anyone is making any comments to the contrary.

This is not even OOO (which would be a best case situation for this scenario), this is a blown call.

In fact, I'd say if F6 had missed the throw you might have gotten away with a freebie OOO int Out, which would be preferable to this horrible OBS call.

not as much as this one
If BU makes that call I'm off counting carrier pigeons while hes getting yelled at, then, later, its my turn to let him know he blew it.

That is horrible. Terrible. You made up OBS. Its easy to end a conversation with a coach in any number of ways; that is the easy part; it is better to understand the rules and their intent and to get it right.

Well, the ball is dead when an obstructed runner is put out. Here's an alternative scenario that one of the more veteran folks can check that covers how I think it should go down in the case where you actually have obstruction (which as many have noted you don't in this play.)

New play with blatant obstruction to simplify:
R1 on 1B. Ball hit to F6 playing close to Second with F4 shifted toward first. F4 collides with R1 a few steps before F6 gets to the bag. F6 to F3 to retire the BR well before the ball gets there. No chance that R1 could have beaten F6 to the bag.

Now, since I called obstruction on a runner who was put out the play the ball was immediately ruled dead (which deals with your parenthetical). The rules say to put everyone where in my judgment they would have gotten if not for the obstruction. I'm not sure that awarding them both seats in the dugout is quite the intent though. So in my OP, as I've understood it, I've got both runners safe because of F4's obstruction. If on the other hand, F6 doesn't step on the base, then I can get the out on BR and put R1 back on 1B.

Does that all sound right?
________
Infants Avandia

I'm not as sure as you are that I wouldn't HTBT, but a good case can be made for this to be considered a "crash". I only questioned the idea that and obstructed runner can be called out between the bases where OBS occurred.

Now who's making things up? Did R1 running into F4 affect F6's ability to catch the ball even if it didn't affect the throw? When you make that call, please post it on here so others can bash you like you've bashed them.

An obstructed runner can be put out between the bases where OBS occurred, and those instances are exactly and clearly defined in the rulebook.

Luckily, there is no obstructed runner in this scenario, so that is moot.

If a made a horrible call like OBS or INT on this play, I would do enough bashing on myself to make up for the fact I would never post it on here :)

You have no dead ball here. You don't put her back on 1B if she successfully made it to 2B while the defense was trying for the out on the BR.

lol... ok, so i made up OBS (you caught me coach)... fielder no longer had the ball and obstructed the runner (per the OP). d$mn, i hate when i make crap up. and making judgements by intent of rule and ignoring word of rule is to be avoided.

dang i hate double posts... :cool:

The runner is either retired...

or

The fielder is fielding and making a play with the batted ball...

So yes, you completely made it up by not only ignoring the rule, but also completely ignoring the intent and spirit of OBS.

On a positive note, I do actually believe you would make this call though. We hear and read about these calls all the time.

Then delete one! :cool:

thanks... didn't know i could do that.

Ok, did i make it up? or choose to ignore it? or did I make up my own rule then ignored it? ok, enough play time... ;)
I took the OP as the fielder threw the ball to 2nd and while watching her smartly thrown ball (since it arrived in "plenty of time for the force) she managed to obs the runner... I would like your opinion of the intent/spirit of OBS and just how long does a fielder get or deserve to be exempted from committing obs? i mean is it one second from the throw? or 2? or what? (i understand they cant go "poof" but they also cant just stand in the way forever (just because they made an initial play).... BTW what would happen if the throw would have went over f6's head and into left center? would you then have OBS? or nothing?

It is impossible for the play to take forever.

Now that you understand that, and previously stated that they cannot go "poof" as the final portion of fielding and making a play with a batted ball.

You should be able to to get this one on your own:

There is another option.. I might not be as inclined to reward the offense for their piss poor base running as youare... maybe that contact of the fielder while they are executing a play with a batted ball caused the errant throw and is something else.. interference.

Could be nothing.

It's not rewarded.

Hmmmm.... a smartly thrown ball for the clean force and F4 remains in the way and impedes R1.

Here's the crux of my issue with the OP's situation... how could R1 not be retired before she is impeded unless she is nearly on top of F4 at the time of the throw? How could either of those be (legitimate) obstruction?

Maybe, in a HTBT kind of way, maybe... but as presented, I'm having a hard time seeing OBS here (I just don't agree that the runner being a dead duck has anything to do with the call....) I see either a retired runner colliding with a fielder, or an active runner (nearly?) interfering with a fielder making a play.

I agree with both of the above... (having given it some thought and debating it). its a beautiful thing. :)