Is this correct

[celebur]

Originally Posted by SamG

So you don't have to have contact for obstruction?

As others already stated, no, contact is not necessary. Some coaches think contact is necessary. Some coaches simply think the BU may miss the obstruction if there was no contact.

ASSUMING... R1 on 1st stealing... F3 is in the direct line path so R1 runs behind her. Ball just barely beats R1 to 2nd, F4 catches & tags R1. BU calls 'Out'. Can offensive coach call time and appeal based on R1 having to run around F3? Let me rephrase... would an appeal be upheld?

This isn't appealable, but the coach can politely ask why there wasn't obstruction on this play. A decent BU would be unlikely to be swayed because he would have seen the play and called the obstruction, so a no call means he saw the play and judged no obstruction.

I'm assuming BU takes into consideration whether R1 would be safe if there is no obstruction (ie: slow runner stealing 2nd, runs around F3, and gets beaten by 2 steps). Would that be correct?

Whether or not the runner would have been safe is NOT taken into consideration for calling obstruction. Either there was or there was not obstruction; if there was, it should be called regardless of whether the runner would be safe or out.

Whether the runner would be safe or out is only taken into consideration for determining how far to protect the runner and, after the play is over, where to place the runner.