Call at First

[youngump]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Forget the OP and forget OBS for a second ---

So I'm clear - your contention is that a BR running to 1B who then trips over it and who lands on the other side of it, would not be considered overrunning first base and they are then eligible to be put out... (even with no attempt to advance - just merely based on the fact they tripped over 1b instead of staying on their feet).

My contention is that while this is technically correct, I'm sure in watching such a play unfold that I would find that runner had in fact overrun the base as part of tripping because I'm certainly never making such a call.

However, a runner who tripped on first base but did not fall past it (visualize an attempt to run right to the base and the runner falling off toward second) would be liable to be put out and I would call that runner out if tagged out just like I would someone who ran to second and fell off.

The fact that no attempt was made to second is not the determination I'm making here. The determination is if the runner overran the bag. (Which is a prerequisite of the overrunning exception. Once we determine they overran the bag, then anything that is not an attempt will keep them safe.)
________
apartments for sale Pattaya

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by youngump

(snip) If it happened with no obstruction, the safe call would be totally unwarranted.

I may be wrong, but......
1) I think the whole point of the discussion was that the fall off the base was related to obstruction, wasn't it?

2) later

[Badamk]

She in no way was attempting to overrun first base. Her intentions were clearly to stop on the bag. She placed one foot on the base and fell off it.

I can see both ways. Obstruction could have been called but there was plenty of base to touch.

All the "you must be an idiot" type comments show your arrogance and unwarranted ego. Just give your opinion.

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by Badamk

She in no way was attempting to overrun first base. Her intentions were clearly to stop on the bag. She placed one foot on the base and fell off it.

I can see both ways. Obstruction could have been called but there was plenty of base to touch.

All the "you must be an idiot" type comments show your arrogance and unwarranted ego. Just give your opinion.

OK. In my opinion, you're an idiot.

[Badamk]

Originally Posted by bkbjones

OK. In my opinion, you're an idiot.

now that is funny.

[vcblue]

Originally Posted by youngump

Overrun means to run beyond or past. They don't have to stay on their feet but to be entitled to the overrunning exception they do have to run past the base. Once they do that I agree with you that they can do whatever they want as long as it isn't an attempt.

If they ran to 1st and stepped on it and fell forward, I'd go with what you're saying as well, though as written a runner tripping over 1st base is liable to be put out.

Negative… unless you truly believed the runner was rounding the base to go for second when she tripped (which could be the case at lower levels. Many times have a heard the first base coach yell, go… go… go… after the ball gets away from the fielder at first base), otherwise you just have a BR that trip while overrunning first base and is allowed to return without liability of being put out.

However, if it was my judgment that she was rounding first to go to second I would not protect her to second due to the earlier obstruction. I would rule her out and get ready to explain to the OC that the obstruction happened before first, and she was protected to first. And, in my judgment she would not have reached second therefore she is out.

This is a HTBT situation, but umpires cannot protect a base runner for making a bad choice.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by youngump

The fact that no attempt was made to second is not the determination I'm making here. The determination is if the runner overran the bag. (Which is a prerequisite of the overrunning exception. Once we determine they overran the bag, then anything that is not an attempt will keep them safe.)

So a BR sliding past first, walking past first, taking one step beyond first, jogging past first would be eligible to be put out as they are not running past first?

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Badamk

She in no way was attempting to overrun first base. Her intentions were clearly to stop on the bag. She placed one foot on the base and fell off it.

I can see both ways. Obstruction could have been called but there was plenty of base to touch.

All the "you must be an idiot" type comments show your arrogance and unwarranted ego. Just give your opinion.

"Plenty of base to touch" has no bearing on Obstruction. It is important that those of you offering opinions on rules take a few minutes and read the rules and definitions. Simply offering opinion that has absolutely no basis in rules is more akin to some idiot in the stand yelling "hands are part of the bat" than a discussion on an officiating forum.

The discussion of overrunning at least is admittedly a little ambigious as there is no case play or definition (that I could find) to use as a guide to define what exactly overrunning is --- obs is very clear so take a few moments and read up on it. Thanks.

[tcblue13]

B-1 hits a line drive to F-9 in a) the BR runs straight up the line and trips over the bag falling on to the ground on the RF foul line. in b) the BR takes a wide turn around the bag in order to be ready to go to second on an errant throw from F-9 but is pulling up and slowing down as she reaches 1B and trips over the bag falling into fair territory between 1B and 2B. In both cases F-9 throws the ball to F-3 who tags the runner off the base.

[ronald]

a) safe judged overrunning
b) out judged rounding the bag

[Badamk]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

"Plenty of base to touch" has no bearing on Obstruction. It is important that those of you offering opinions on rules take a few minutes and read the rules and definitions. Simply offering opinion that has absolutely no basis in rules is more akin to some idiot in the stand yelling "hands are part of the bat" than a discussion on an officiating forum.

The discussion of overrunning at least is admittedly a little ambigious as there is no case play or definition (that I could find) to use as a guide to define what exactly overrunning is --- obs is very clear so take a few moments and read up on it. Thanks.

I've read and reread everything I could find about obstruction and baserunning. There is nothing that clearly defines this call. Any other base she's out, no questions asked because I saw the play and don't feel she was obstructed (on that call I could be wrong but...). At first base the question comes in about the "overrunning".

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Badamk

I've read and reread everything I could find about obstruction and baserunning. There is nothing that clearly defines this call. Any other base she's out, no questions asked because I saw the play and don't feel she was obstructed (on that call I could be wrong but...). At first base the question comes in about the "overrunning".

I agree - nothing clearly spells out this call for use - hence the reason we have judgments based on rules.

Obstruction IS clearly defined, and nothing is mentioned about "plenty of base to touch".

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Badamk

She in no way was attempting to overrun first base. Her intentions were clearly to stop on the bag. She placed one foot on the base and fell off it.

It doesn't make any difference what you think her intentions were. I'm assuming this was not Mary Lou Retton attempting a forward double with a 1 1/2 twist trying to nail the landing.

At not time is a BR is required to stop and remain on 1B. Really don't care what the deal is at 2nd & 3rd as that is irrelevant to a BR at 1st.

"Overrunning" is a generic term undefined by ASA or any other rule set of which I am aware. There are no requirements stating the BR MUST be on his/her feet before, after or while contacting 1B.

I can see both ways. Obstruction could have been called but there was plenty of base to touch.

Say what?

All the "you must be an idiot" type comments show your arrogance and unwarranted ego. Just give your opinion.

You received opinions (which are like...) and interpretations, but a few don't want to hear them because they don't agree. There are a lot of real ridiculous rules, but my opinion of them has no bearing on how I rule on the field.

[robbie]

[QUOTE=vcblue;598879]
However, if it was my judgment that she was rounding first to go to second I would not protect her to second due to the earlier obstruction. I would rule her out and get ready to explain to the OC that the obstruction happened before first, and she was protected to first. And, in my judgment she would not have reached second therefore she is out.

In the above post she cannot be out. If the obstruction happens prior to BR reaching first, the play is dead and obstruction awards are made. Subsequent out cannot take place.

[vcblue]

[QUOTE=robbie;599004]

Originally Posted by vcblue

However, if it was my judgment that she was rounding first to go to second I would not protect her to second due to the earlier obstruction. I would rule her out and get ready to explain to the OC that the obstruction happened before first, and she was protected to first. And, in my judgment she would not have reached second therefore she is out.

In the above post she cannot be out. If the obstruction happens prior to BR reaching first, the play is dead and obstruction awards are made. Subsequent out cannot take place.

What are you talking about??? (in bold) The OBS happened before first base and she is protected to first. Now if my "what-if" scenario she decides to continue on to second and is tag out, and in my judgment she would not have made second, she's out.

You don't protect a runner to the next base because she made a bad running decision. You protect her to the next base because you thought she would have made it had there been no OBS.