blocking the plate question

[sumfan]

great forum
i am a asa coach and before that a youth league coach.
i have a question for you.
what is the proper way according to the asa rules ( i have been reading the rule book but have not found it)
for a player to positon herself to recieve the throw at a base
we have told our girls to staddle the base and leave the center open
at some asa tournys this was fine but at some it was not
the girls were told they had to be behind the plate or to the side.
i am just looking for the best way to instruct our girls

as i stated before a great forum i have been reading the posts and have learned alot of useful information

thank you for your time
sumfan

[argodad]

Originally Posted by sumfan

great forum

what is the proper way according to the asa rules ( i have been reading the rule book but have not found it)
for a player to positon herself to recieve the throw at a base

Your defender cannot cause the runner to slow or alter her path (unless she already has the ball). Suggest you coach them to set up on the incoming throw side of the runner's path ... make the catch ... and move to tag.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by sumfan

great forum
i am a asa coach and before that a youth league coach.
i have a question for you.
what is the proper way according to the asa rules ( i have been reading the rule book but have not found it)
for a player to positon herself to recieve the throw at a base
we have told our girls to staddle the base and leave the center open
at some asa tournys this was fine but at some it was not
the girls were told they had to be behind the plate or to the side.
i am just looking for the best way to instruct our girls

as i stated before a great forum i have been reading the posts and have learned alot of useful information

thank you for your time
sumfan

Umpires should stay away from telling you how to coach your girls. The rule book doesn't give specifics. It speaks more in generalities and for good reason. If we put in every possible way a player could obstruct or interfere the rule book would be the size of the Atlanta Phonebook or War and Peace and be about as boring. The only thing the rule book does say, and I believe it is back in the Rule Supplement section, is that coaches formerly taught to block the base, catch the ball and then apply the tag. Now coaches must teach, catch the ball then block the base. The ASA rule book isn't going to give you what you are looking for. The best advice I can give is don't impede the runner without the ball. Also, there is no minimum amount of the base you have to give the runner. The runner is entitled to slide into any portion of the bag. You can't argue that we gave her half of the bag. If the runner decides to go to the part your defender is blocking and is impeded this is obstruction.

I know I didn't give you what you asked for, but I hope this helps.

[NCASAUmp]

Very true, guys. In this case, the rule book does not say what a defensive player CAN do, only what a defensive player CAN'T do. The only advice I can offer is to tell your players that they can't block the runner's path without the ball, and the runner can choose their own path.

So get out the way!

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by sumfan

great forum
i am a asa coach and before that a youth league coach.
i have a question for you.
what is the proper way according to the asa rules ( i have been reading the rule book but have not found it)
for a player to positon herself to recieve the throw at a base
we have told our girls to staddle the base and leave the center open
at some asa tournys this was fine but at some it was not
the girls were told they had to be behind the plate or to the side.
i am just looking for the best way to instruct our girls

as i stated before a great forum i have been reading the posts and have learned alot of useful information

thank you for your time
sumfan

Coach,
There's no "proper" way to do it.

There are some handy tools out there, however. Have you taken the ACE courses this year? I know it talks about it in some of the ACE material, but I also know some JO commissioners aren't quite as adamant about coaches getting their ACE certification as others.

The rules supplement, in the back part of your edition of the rule book talks about obstruction. As rwest pointed out, the obstruction rule (changed 3-4 years ago) pretty much requires your girls to catch the ball, then block and tag.

Straddling the base, even if you think this gives the runner "some of the base," may be obstruction one time, not obstruction another time. Remember: the runner establishes the base path. Remember, too, obstruction is a judgement call by the umpire. One ump's obstruction might not be obstruction in someone else's eye.

Look up that ACE material, check out the rules supplement concerning obstruction, and visit with coaches you respect about how your players should position themselves.

Good luck to you and your team.

[reccer]

One ump's obstruction might not be obstruction in someone else's eye.

----------------------------------------------------
Coach here.
Jones comment is a key takeaway from this thread. I'm finding my former coaching brethen turned Blues are much more apt to call obstruction than the old school guys who started their profession under different guidelines.

Go back and look at the much discussed crash video. Why is the catcher so deep (behind the base path to begin with?) If she were in front of the basepath, would she possibly have been able to catch the throw on the fly and apply the tag a split second sooner? Straddling the base path without the ball gave her an advantage to force the runner into a wider path. Unfortunately for our catcher, the runner chose the direct line approach.

The Blues on this forum generally agree that potential obstruction occurred on the part of the catcher, but they saw no deviation in the runners path as a reaction to the obstruction. Through the magic of the pause button, I see a reaction on the part of the runner prior to the ball being possessed by the fielder. She is lowering her body into heat seaking missle mode and being prematurely forced to slide. The correct call should be obstruction, and MC.

My advice is do not teach your kids to block bases but DO teach them to look for contact with a defender without the ball. The inside corner belongs to the runner. Blues are not calling obstruction without contact. (See recent discussion regarding the non called obstruction in the CWS game)

Its tough enough to generate offense with the batters box to batters box sized strike zone, we need some rules interpretations leaning in the offenses direction.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by reccer

Coach here.
Jones comment is a key takeaway from this thread. I'm finding my former coaching brethen turned Blues are much more apt to call obstruction than the old school guys who started their profession under different guidelines.

Go back and look at the much discussed crash video. Why is the catcher so deep (behind the base path to begin with?) If she were in front of the basepath, would she possibly have been able to catch the throw on the fly and apply the tag a split second sooner? Straddling the base path without the ball gave her an advantage to force the runner into a wider path. Unfortunately for our catcher, the runner chose the direct line approach.

The Blues on this forum generally agree that potential obstruction occurred on the part of the catcher, but they saw no deviation in the runners path as a reaction to the obstruction. Through the magic of the pause button, I see a reaction on the part of the runner prior to the ball being possessed by the fielder. She is lowering her body into heat seaking missle mode and being prematurely forced to slide. The correct call should be obstruction, and MC.

There is no "potential obstruction" on a play. Either there is OBS, or there isn't. I think the majority of us ruled that there was no OBS, as there was no deviation by the runner. OBS can ONLY be called if the runner is hindered, and we judge whether or not she was hindered by whether or not she deviated her base path.

Originally Posted by reccer

My advice is do not teach your kids to block bases but DO teach them to look for contact with a defender without the ball. The inside corner belongs to the runner. Blues are not calling obstruction without contact. (See recent discussion regarding the non called obstruction in the CWS game)

Horsesh1t. Most of my OBS calls never had contact. In fact, I'd say that 80% or more of my OBS calls on the field never had ANY contact whatsoever.

Originally Posted by reccer

Its tough enough to generate offense with the batters box to batters box sized strike zone, we need some rules interpretations leaning in the offenses direction.

The rules aren't there to benefit one aspect of the game over another. They're there to protect the game by keeping things fair and on an even keel.

As the old saying goes, "if it were easy, everyone would be doing it."

[rwest]

Originally Posted by reccer

The inside corner belongs to the runner. Blues are not calling obstruction without contact.

This concept that a certain portion of the bag belongs to the runner and a certain portion to the defense is wrong! We need to get away from this type of thinking. The rule is clear, but we seem to what to make it more complicated than it needs to be. The defense can't impede the offense unless they have possession of the ball or they are in the act of fielding a batted ball. Its that simple. Just tell your players to get out of the runners way. Don't tell them the inside corner belongs to the offense because then if they are blocking the outside corner and that's where the runner choses to go we still can have obstruction. Now we have a coach coming out saying "The inside corner belongs to the runner". No Coach, the runner can chose to go to any portion of the bag and the defense can't impede her without the ball. And as someone else has said, most of my obstruction calls have no contact at all. It mainly happens at first where the first baseman is not getting out of the way of the batter-runner rounding first on their way to second or third on a double or triple. No contact, but an obvious deviation of their direction, speed or balance.

[reccer]

The inside corner belongs to the runner

Blue, you were taught to catch the corner when baserunning. That is the inside corner I am referring to.

Female runners routinely have to hit the top of the bag when base running because defensive players are cluelessly going to their bag when they don't have the ball.

Attached is a picture for illustration. F5 (DD) has thrown wildly to first and F9 fell down when backing up. At the time of the picture, ball is rolling into RF corner, yet SS is cluelessly at/near her bag. She should be moving into backup position for the relay throw home.

Slideshows

[marvin]

Originally Posted by reccer

My advice is do not teach your kids to block bases but DO teach them to look for contact with a defender without the ball. The inside corner belongs to the runner. Blues are not calling obstruction without contact. (See recent discussion regarding the non called obstruction in the CWS game)

At least in high school MC trumps the OBS, also the emphasis should be on safety. DO NOT teach players to SEEK CONTACT. You are teaching them to play in an unsportsmanlike manner. In my experience, when an obstruction call is missed it not because there was no contact, it is because the ump had other responsibilities with multiple runners on.

When the defender does not have the ball (speaking HS again) they have no reason to block any part of the base or the runner's chosen path to the base. If they do and the runner is hindered then obstruction should be called.

Remember the OBS rule does not give runners a license to run over defenders. The rule is there to prevent contact by providing a remedy for the an obstructed runner, not to provide a target for runners to crash into defenders.

[reccer]

Originally Posted by marvin

At least in high school MC trumps the OBS, also the emphasis should be on safety. DO NOT teach players to SEEK CONTACT. You are teaching them to play in an unsportsmanlike manner. In my experience, when an obstruction call is missed it not because there was no contact, it is because the ump had other responsibilities with multiple runners on.

I agree with you. There is a lot going on, especially for two man crew.

Don't put a Jack Tatum on them, but get some contact to draw Blue's attention.

Bottom line. Just have your runners do what they are supposed to do. If they are supposed to catch corners, have them do so, if the defender is in the way, well............

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by reccer

I agree with you. There is a lot going on, especially for two man crew.

Don't put a Jack Tatum on them, but get some contact to draw Blue's attention.

Bottom line. Just have your runners do what they are supposed to do. If they are supposed to catch corners, have them do so, if the defender is in the way, well............

I disagree with the "get some contact" statement. If I heard a coach tell his/her player that they should intentionally make contact with a player, I might have a few words for that coach (before considering sending them off to the parking lot).

My suggestion is to simply have the runner go, "woah!" as they dodge the defensive player. That's a better way of catching an umpire's attention, especially if they're watching another runner or checking for the ball.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by reccer

Don't put a Jack Tatum on them, but get some contact to draw Blue's attention.

I believe NFHS added the malicious contact rule a couple years ago because of coaches teaching this exact tactic. It was explained to me that umpires weren't calling obstruction when it had no bearing on the play. So coaches started instructing their players to initiate contact to draw the obstruction call. Now, if this is done maliciously we can get an out even with no play involved. The case play that was presented was the typical play at first, where the first baseman doesn't get out of the way and the runner collides with F3 intentionally to draw the OBS.

Coach, IMHO, it would be wise to avoid teaching this tactic to your players. Otherwise, you might get an out and then an ejection when you argue the call.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by reccer

Coach here.
Jones comment is a key takeaway from this thread. I'm finding my former coaching brethen turned Blues are much more apt to call obstruction than the old school guys who started their profession under different guidelines.

Maybe it is because they have now learned the rule properly.

Go back and look at the much discussed crash video. Why is the catcher so deep (behind the base path to begin with?) If she were in front of the basepath, would she possibly have been able to catch the throw on the fly and apply the tag a split second sooner? Straddling the base path without the ball gave her an advantage to force the runner into a wider path. Unfortunately for our catcher, the runner chose the direct line approach.

Again, learning the rule is important. You insist on making a coach's argument which as absolutly no validity as the rule applies.

The Blues on this forum generally agree that potential obstruction occurred on the part of the catcher, but they saw no deviation in the runners path as a reaction to the obstruction. Through the magic of the pause button, I see a reaction on the part of the runner prior to the ball being possessed by the fielder. She is lowering her body into heat seaking missle mode and being prematurely forced to slide.

But she is NOT being forced to slide. For that matter, this isn't even a slide.

The correct call should be obstruction, and MC.

Aahhh......no. There was no obstruction. By rule, an obstruction call is not available based upon any actions or lack of by either the offense or defense. If you believe there was obstruction, you do not know the rule.

My advice is do not teach your kids to block bases but DO teach them to look for contact with a defender without the ball. The inside corner belongs to the runner.

Again, if you believe that, you do not know the rule. The WHOLE FIELD belongs to the runner. A runner may take ANY PATH they like as long as it is not out of the basepath to avoid a tag or an act of interference.

If a runner makes contact with a defender intentionally, the runner is done. If the coach is dumb enough to come out to argue the point and happens to mention that is how s/he coaches, the player will have company.

Blues are not calling obstruction without contact. (See recent discussion regarding the non called obstruction in the CWS game)

This is incorrect. Just because you see an instance where it wasn't called does not make your statement true. Good umpires routinely call OBS when they see it. Hell, half the time the coaches aren't even aware of the call if it doesn't advance their runner a base. That doesn't mean it wasn't called.

Its tough enough to generate offense with the batters box to batters box sized strike zone, we need some rules interpretations leaning in the offenses direction.

You wanted to cite the NCAA's? Well, I just hated seeing all those 1-0 games this year, the offense really sucked.

[reccer]

The case play that was presented was the typical play at first, where the first baseman doesn't get out of the way and the runner collides with F3 intentionally to draw the OBS.


Duly noted guys, and thanks for the case play reference. But remember, I coach in Texas, and apparently anything short of decapitation is not MC.