Is this correct

[SamG]

Who has responsibility to avoid contact?

R1 on 1st. F3 &/or F4 lined up on the straight line path between 1st & 2nd. R1 attempts to steal... (batter doesn't swing. I know things change if a ball is hit to F3/F4).

a) R1 takes the direct line toward 2nd base and makes contact with F3 or F4.
b) R1 takes an indirect route (running behind F3/F4) to 2nd.

I've heard coaches teach baserunners to at least bump the fielders in order to draw an obstruction call.
I've heard coaches teach fielders to make sure they stand in the baseline in order to make the runners take a (slightly) longer path between bases.

What I've learned is a) is obstruction, b) is nothing. I have a problem telling girls to intentionally make contact with a member of the other team, but at the same time I have a problem teaching fielders to intentionally line up in the baseline.

What do the rules support?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by SamG

Who has responsibility to avoid contact?

R1 on 1st. F3 &/or F4 lined up on the straight line path between 1st & 2nd. R1 attempts to steal... (batter doesn't swing. I know things change if a ball is hit to F3/F4).

a) R1 takes the direct line toward 2nd base and makes contact with F3 or F4.
b) R1 takes an indirect route (running behind F3/F4) to 2nd.

I've heard coaches teach baserunners to at least bump the fielders in order to draw an obstruction call.
I've heard coaches teach fielders to make sure they stand in the baseline in order to make the runners take a (slightly) longer path between bases.

What I've learned is a) is obstruction, b) is nothing. I have a problem telling girls to intentionally make contact with a member of the other team, but at the same time I have a problem teaching fielders to intentionally line up in the baseline.

What do the rules support?

The runner has a right to go where they want but you shouldn't let the runner do something solely to draw an obstruction call. If a fielder is in the way and the runner deviates because of that we have obstruction. If the runner runs out to right field turns toward second and then has to deviate because the right fielder didn't get out of the way then we have obstruction. (The kind that gets the runner sent back to first of course).

If the runner is running to second and at the last second veers into the defender who isn't in the base path and draws contact that's not obstruction.
________
ANGELINALOVE

[SamG]

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

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?

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?

[MichaelVA2000]

Originally Posted by SamG

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

Contact is NOT neccessary.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by SamG

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

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?

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?

BU should call obstruction when he sees it. But the coach can come out and try and convince him that he messed up and hope he'll correct it. That'll be a nightmare on the field when you tell the defense.

As to your scenario if called correctly, the BU **at the time of the obstruction** determines which base he believes the runner would have achieved if not obstructed and then protects accordingly.
________
Avandia settlement info

[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.

[SamG]

Thanks all!

[IRISHMAFIA]

As usual, this has become convoluted.

It is real simple. If the defender is not fielding a batted ball, s/he cannot impede the runner. Stop trying to overthink it.

It doesn't make any difference where the player was standing or if there was contact or not.

[New Blue]

Originally Posted by celebur

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.

Unfortunately, it seems like a lot of us seem to think you need contact as well. Not that I have a ton of experience, but this seems to be a real weak area in training.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by New Blue

Unfortunately, it seems like a lot of us seem to think you need contact as well. Not that I have a ton of experience, but this seems to be a real weak area in training.

Why do you feel that way... what were you taught regarding obstruction?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by New Blue

Unfortunately, it seems like a lot of us seem to think you need contact as well.

Not anywhere I have ever been.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by New Blue

Unfortunately, it seems like a lot of us seem to think you need contact as well.

Speak for yourself!

Training is one thing, but at some point any individual umpire should be reading the rulebook on his own. And it says right there in the definition for obstruction that "contact is not necessary".

[argodad]

Originally Posted by SamG

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

Sam,
When I coached (many years ago), I had my girls yell, "MOVE!" if the fielder obstructed them between bases (or rounding first). Many times the loud yell would soon be followed by an OBS call from the BU.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by argodad

Sam,
When I coached (many years ago), I had my girls yell, "MOVE!" if the fielder obstructed them between bases (or rounding first). Many times the loud yell would soon be followed by an OBS call from the BU.

Then again, no action by the runner should be necessary to get the umpire to make the call. Another reason why I don't believe it is important for an umpire to worry about watching a ball on the ground in the outfield.