Interference in ASA? (Padres vs Giants video)
 

Saw this play on Sportscenter (Padres vs Giants game on 8/13/10) the other day and it got me thinking about if this same play were in an ASA softball game and what the appropriate call would be.

Umps sure call on moot protest was right | MLB.com: News

Towards the end of the video are some better angles on the play and also their first mention of a "deflected ball."

The MLB rule states nothing about a deflected ball scenario unlike ASA were the interference has to be intentional by the runner after a deflected batted ball. (ASA Rule 8-7-J-4)

Just looking for some opinions (ASA ruleset) on whether it's a
1) no call (play on)
2) obstruction (delayed dead ball signal given, protect runner to 2nd base)
3) interference (dead ball - runner is out)

How could there possibly have been obstruction on that play?

And please don't hold your arm out until they reach second. Mechanically wrong and you look silly.

Is a deflected batted ball treated the same as a batted ball?
I would have to say no.

If they were the same then why have it as a separate rule under the interference section (rule 8-7-J)
and not include it with a batted ball in the obstruction rule (8-5-B-4)

Rule 8-5-B-4 - When a runner, while advancing or returning to a base
a) is obstructed by a fielder who neither has the ball or
b) is attempting to field a batted or thrown ball or
c) when a fielder fakes a tag w/o the ball

Therefore, the fielder does not have possession of the ball, is not fielding a batted ball (deflected - yes, batted - no) and is hindering the progress of the runner. Obstruction?

I can't run the video ... who did it deflect off of?

Pitcher

Kind of changes everything, doesn't it?

Interference.

ASA Rule citation to back that up?

Sorry - got my alphabet soups mixed up there. Not enough coffee yet today. ASA, the contact must be intentional on a deflected ball. NFHS, the pitcher is excluded from that. My bad - yes, this is not interference.

As to obstruction, again, I can't see the video. If the fielder cause the runner to alter their path without possession of the ball, you would have obstruction. HTBT, so not seeing the video until I get home, I plead the 5th.

Just don't hold that arm up until they reach 2nd!!! :)

So as the umpire you're going to make an obstruction call on that play, based on a strict literal interpretation of the rule, and with no regard for what you saw take place on the video of the play?

KJ, I can't see it - what happened in the video, and what makes you say it's not OBS?

The ball was deflected by the pitcher, so any interference has to be intentional. i did not see anything intentional on the part of the runner.

Under ASA rules, I have obstruction on the second baseman (and I am putting my arm out immediately).

Under NFHS rules, I do have an interference call as F4 is in the process of making the "initial play". The deflection of the ball by the pitcher is a moot point for this ruleset.

The video looks like definite hindrance, by whom is just a question of which rule as Andy and others said. If deflection off the pitcher overides "fielding a batted ball", then it looks like OBS. If not, it looks like INT. Then, whether intent matters in one rule set or the other affects the call and of course whether the umpire judges it intentional.

mb...
Anyway you can run it by going directly to the Padres team site thru the MLB website? It's there, click on "More News" on the Padre site and you'll see the headline.
KJ

Those are all simply blocked here at work. I have to wait until I get home.

mbcrowder:

Speaking ASA, what is the proper mechanic?

Last summer, we had a situation where a B/R was obstructed by F3 (F3 had his back to the bag and never saw where the BR was) rounding first and the umpire neither signaled nor verbalized obstruction. I didn't even know if he had even seen the OBS until after play ended and he told F3 to pay attention and stay out of the way when there is no play at first.

That's worse. I guess given the two choices, running around with your arm sticking out looking silly is superior to not verbalizing or signaling! :)

And probably slightly better than one partner I worked with for the first time who yelled "obstruction at first!!!!" so loud that everyone - fielders, runners, coaches, even me - stopped what they were doing to see what he was yelling about.

Anyway... verbalize, and signal for long enough that others have a chance to see it.

There are a LOT of umpires out there who seem to think (or worse ... teach) that you should hold your arm out until the moment the runner gets to the base you were going to protect them to (even if that means all the way from first to home). This is wrong. 2 seconds or so is probably plenty.

8.7.J.4. It must be intentional for the umpire to rule INT.

It is NOT obstruction because the fielder is attempting to field a batted ball.

There is nothing that says it must be dropped, but it doesn't have to be held throughout the play. Personally, if there is a possibility that the runner may run out of protection. Then again, I don't "run" around like an idiot. My steps across the field are slow and very calculated. If I need to kick it up, yeah, I'm not running around with my arm out.

What I find and have experienced as problematic is the "verbal" instruction. I have never had a situation where the verbal did not distract the players. But being the good guy, I verbalize in a very low voice.

IMO, verbalizing makes it more likely that the players and coaches will begin playing to the call, not the game in front of them.

Is honesty a virtue?

OK, being honest, I have never verbalized obstruction in any softball game since I started in 1972. I have stated, if asked, that "you just didn't hear me" the VERY few times I have been asked.

IMO, verbalization is a mechanic inherited from baseball (where they HOPE to stop play, since it makes awards easier) that should have been, but just never was dropped from softball. It serves no purpose at all, since base coaches can see the signal (if they are paying attention), and should be coaching to the play, not our signal or verbalization.

I have OBS as the fielder is en route to field the ball, not in the act of fielding it.

By the way, the OBS rule supplement is unhelpful in regard to the red text above, as it omits the thrown ball part of the rule.

I had used the RS recently to revise my INT and OBS understandings and not long after ruled a sitch incorrectly where a fielder was waiting on a thrown ball while on the base path when collided with by a runner.

And yes, I know, the supplement is just a supplement and the rules are where the rules are :cool:.

I verbalized obstruction once. Everyone stopped, looked at me, and the runner just walked back to second base. He could have walked all the way home, and I'll bet you no one would have stopped him. It only confused the players.

I won't do that again.

Just to further my confusion on this, the definition of OBS in rule 1 matches the description in the supplement (i.e. fielding a thrown ball is not mentioned) but differs from 8.5.B.4 ("or thrown ball"). Do we have two rules disagreeing here and which is the correct one to apply?

I agree wholeheartedly with the last two paragraphs.

Re: the first. If you are BU and have OBS at 1st base on an obvious 4-base hit, you really hold the arm up the whole time until she scores? We've been told many many times that you hold it up long enough for people to see you had a call.

+1

(I verbalize, but if anyone can hear me it's the fielder that did it - and that's iffy at best)

Possibly, but then again, I'm not running around and very likely just taking a few steps around the pitcher's plate.

It isn't a problem and it definitely gives the offense an idea of what is going on. After all, just because you think it should have been seen doesn't mean it is.

Thanks. I knew from previous discussion that most umpires prefer not to verbalize since it tends to make players freeze up, but it would be nice to see a signal even if for a couple of seconds.

IrishMafia: How well, I know. We had what appeared to be OBS in our championship game this year where R1 on second went to advance to third on a 5-3 groundout and was blocked by F6 who had his back to R1's advance. On what ended up being a bang-bang play at third, the umpire calls R1 out. :eek:

After the game I asked R1 why there was no obstruction called and he said that the umpire never saw it since he was apparently still turned towards first base when OBS occurred. But without umpires signalling it consistently, you never know what is or isn't seen as a player or base coach.