Obstruction but with a twist.
 

MTD, Jr., Daryl "The Preacher" H. Long, and I umpired in an ASA girls' fastpitch tournament this weekend and Daryl and I had an unusual play in one game where I was the PU and Daryl was the BU. I will try to describe it in great detail so as to minimize any HTBTs. The game was a 12U age group. Here goes:

PLAY: Runner on 1B (R1) with one out. B3 rips, a line drive into right-center field for a base hit. R1 is off on contact, passes (maked contact with the bag) 2B, and heads for 3B. The 3B coach gives her the windmill to head for HP. R1 is running straight down the 3B Foul Line toward HP.

Now lets talk about F2. Picture a line that is parallel to the 1B FL and it intersects the 3B FL about two feet on the 3B side of HP. F2 is standing on this line just inside the 3B FL waiting for a possible relay throw; at this point she is not obstructing R1. (Right now all of the basketball officials reading this post should be thinking about Time and Distance when setting a screen against a moving opponent.)

The relay throw is high and F2 leaps up and back toward the 3B FL. As F2 leaps back R1 runs into F2 as the ball glances off of F2's glove. When the contact occured I called out: "That's Obstruction!" and by then R1 and F2 were on the ground, writhing in pain (I am not exagerating, because I was feeling the pain too.). F2 lands on top of HP and R1 lands just inches short short of HP. I now called out "Time!" and coaches from both teams came out to attend to F2 and R1. Remember R1 had not touched HP and I had never signaled her safe because she never touched or even crossed HP.

After a few minutes, both players got up and play resumed with neither player leaving the game. R1 walked into her dugout under her own power; both team's scorers marked down a run scored by R1; and B4 entered the Batter's Box and the game resumed. The Defense did not appeal R1 never touching HP, B4 took her cuts at the plate, and we finished the game.

As I stated at the beginning this tournament was being played under ASA rules. But I would like to entertain a discussion not only under ASA rules, but NFHS, NCAA, USSSA, and for our esteemed members who have had the honor of working a game under ISF rules as to if we handled this play correctly, and if not how could we have done it differently.

This was tournament was the last umpiring (both baseball and softball) of the summer for the three of us, so it is time to put the gear away and get ready for next year.

MTD, Sr.

Stop right here! Speaking ASA & ISF, this is the end of the story. You killed the play. You now have to rule. Solely by your definition, you have OBS. Award the runner home.

The following is irrelevant to the ruling.

I did award R1 HP for the obstruction, BUT, doesn't R1 (or her substitute, if she was unable to continue playing) still need to complete her base running duties?

MTD, Sr.

P.S. Therefore, I still want to entertain a discussion per NFHS, NCAA, ASA, ISF, and USSSA rules.

Yes. The key to whether you did this correctly, in my mind, is whether R1 abandoned or merely missed the base. If she was "just inches" from the base, then I'm good with ruling she missed the base, and therefore the defense must appeal.

OTOH, if she abandoned her base and entered the dugout, you have an out. As you describe the play, I would have ruled it a missed base, as you did, requiring an appeal.

Agree with Mike, once you call Time, it's over. My assumption is that you called time because players were potentially injured and required immediate attention, in your judgement. If so, all runners are awarded bases you judge they would have attained without your killing the play. In this case, I am going to make sure, once the 'medical' treatment is complete that the coach and runners are aware that they have been awarded specific bases (hint, hint) and not just let them leave. There was, after all, a more important issue at hand (particularly at this age group), as you have judged by calling Time.

As to ruling obstruction, the only difference I can see in NCAA is the about to receive clause that could negate obstruction if the timing of the play was appropriate. Can't speak to ISF (yet).

ISF rule requires possession; it was the first major rule set to do so, and ASA (then NFHS) used that as the basis to change their rules.

Okay, I did cut that short, but I would consider that as subsequent play and not relevant until the offended team takes action. You could call her out for a properly appealed missed base, but not abandonment.

Just a question. Did you announce the award of home?

No I did not because the train wreck was such a bang bang play and my first instinct was to call time so that the players could be attended to. Everybody heard me call out "That's Obstruction!" and everybody saw that F2 never caught the ball. Therefore, no one questioned the fact that R1 never touched HP. I don't know what the coaches from either team were thinking but F2's HC never questioned the Obstruciton call. So I guess everybody was happy that neither player was hurt and lets play on was everybody attitude.

MTD, Sr.

If this is ASA rule set I have a question?
When did they change the call for Obstruction?
You said you called out that is obstruction, but you said F2 did not catch the ball.
Isn't that DDB until she is put out or she reaches the base and is safe?

Obstruction is a delayed dead ball. The DDB signal is used by extending your left arm straight out to the side with a closed fist.

I teach that the verbal is optional, but if you choose to use a verbal, it should be said in a normal voice so that any players in the immediate area can hear you, not to use a loud voice to call OBSTRUCTION, THAT'S OBSTRUCTION!. Usually, when an umpire starts yelling out a call, players tend to stop playing, especially at the 12u level. The DDB requires that we let the play complete, then make a ruling, if needed.

I think MrRabbit got that part; what I get from his question is that the runner was not put out, nor reached the base safely. So, he questions why a dead ball as a result of the obstruction.

What I get from the OP isn't that the dead ball resulted from the obstruction, but that the umpire killed the play due to the collision, and concern for the safety of the players (ASA 10.4-G). So, nothing changed from proper mechanics; but you HTBT to judge for yourself if the dead ball was necessary.

In championship play (and in the older ages, mind you), the literal interpretation of 10.4-G ("requires immediate attention") is less involved in if Suzy is hurt than if Suzy's injury will be worse if ignored for just a few more seconds while the play plays out. At 12U and not a National, I tend to support the former more than the latter.

Edit to add:

As to other rule sets, I would disagree with calling "Time" in NCAA, ISF, and NFHS in this play, as I would in ASA championship play; the verbiage used in those rule sets spell out more clearly that the play must remain live unless greater injury would result from continuing play. I would claim zero knowledge about U-trip.

Is Suzy hurt bad? or Does it just hurt bad. :)

Unless I see bone/blood - or there is a following runner that could run into a downed player and increase the injury, play on.

As to the OP, I believe the only thing I'd have handled differently is making sure the runner hears you award her home. Touching it is her responsibility, but you have 2 reasons for the award here - both the OBS and killing the play. It's important that you give the runner at least a little indication that she still has baserunning duties.

I would submit that any "injury" where both players got up and neither left the game wouldn't meet the definition of:

ASA 10.4-G "when a player becomes injured and in the umpire's judgment requires immediate attention".

NFHS 5-2-1-d "injury occurs during a live ball, then time shall not be called until no further advance or putout is possible. Note: If necessary, the umpire may suspend play immediately if .... further play may cause injury or jeopardize a participant's safety.

NCAA 15.10.2.3 "An umpire shall not temporarily suspend play .... in case of injury until all plays in progress have been completed or each runner has been held at her base. Exception: When necessary to protect an injured player ...".

ISF 10.8-f "In case of injury, except in the umpires' judgment with a serious injury which may put the player in danger, "TIME" shall not be called until all plays in progress have been completed, or runners have been held at their bases."

So, the hard and party line, this almost assuredly didn't meet the criteria to kill the play. And, in NCAA, at least, and most upper level ASA Nationals, you would be challenged if you suspended play on this play. But, our society has led us to believe we should call "Time" when Suzy is hurt at all. But the rules don't tell us to stop if we don't know, only to stop if, in our (sole!!) judgment, further play would 1) cause more injury, 2) jeopardize safety, 3) player requires protection, 4) player is in danger, or 5) player needs immediate attention. No one set of rules says stop any time Suzy is hurt.

You can be sued if Suzy is hurt badly, whether you stopped play or not; and the likelihood is the same, based on the intent of the lawyers involved, not on if you stopped the game, or even the extent of the injury. Since you are following the rules as spelled out, there is no added liability for not stopping the game, and your "judgment" is considered fairly immune in a court of law; to get added damages, a plaintiff would have to prove you KNEW it was a serious injury, you KNEW if you delayed a few seconds the injury would be worse, and you STILL chose to disregard that knowledge. That is gross negligence (the time your umpire insurance stops covering you) as opposed to negligence (for which you ARE covered); you not being a medical professional capable of KNOWING makes you immune from the "but how did you know, you should have stopped it just because you didn't know" arguments.

So, based on societal expectations, the stoppage is defensible, and probably expected; by the rules, play on until all play has ended.

I want to reiterate why I stopped play. R1 was running as hard as she could along the 3B FL toward HP when the contact between R1 and F2 occured. The collision a TRAIN WRECK!! And both players went to the ground writhing in pain. Both players needed "immediate attention" as stated in ASA 10.4-G. Granted some will take HTBT position but believe me when I say, play needed to be stopped immediately. Either player or both players could have suffered serious injuries from the collision and it was just dumb luck that neither one did. The possible injuries could have been: broken ribs (think punctured lung), broken collar bone, broken arm, whip lash, and concussion come to mind.

MTD, Sr.

I guess you bought the new umpire indicator, with the ability to tell the future? ;)

Steve (all kidding aside), I think you pointed out (quite well, I might add) one big factor-the different organizations have different criteria in which to invoke this particular rule. And as MD, Sr. pointed out (as well as my failed attempt for humor), you really don't know if a serious injury has happened until after they are attended to.

I only made this ruling once (ASA rule set, girl's JO)- BR caught in between 1st and 2nd, she switches directions and twists a knee. The only problem: the ball was thrown into left field in an attempt to retire her at second. I stopped play, and placed the sub on 2nd. I probably would not have made the same call in NCAA, nor a ASA M/W FP/SP.

But there is another part to this thread. Do you advise the runner about touching the plate? My answer is ABSOLUTELY. There is no way I will allow the defense to "benefit" from their improper actions. A few months ago, in a high school playoff game (first inning), sac fly where R1 is knocked down by the catcher before she has possession of the ball. I signal obstruction, then have a dead ball as the runner was tagged. I announced the obstruction and the award. Both players are down and being attended to. As the offensive coach is attending, I tell him "make sure the runner touches the plate." I know some may disagree, but like I said previously, how can you allow the defense to benefit?

This is unlike any other situation where awards are made, and therefore I would act/rule/officiate/advise differently.

Well, this doesn't, or isn't supposed to, fall under the rule since this isn't a case where the injury requires immediate attention.

This is why I don't like the rule. I understand it, but I don't like being put in the position we are experiencing here.

This was a coach-driven rule that was initiated because the coaches & parents would run out onto the field anything something would go awry. If the umpire said something, the coaches/parents told them they didn't care. This is also a rule that stick-and-ball games have had no need for over a century, but all of a sudden the world is going to come to an end if Lil' Suzy doesn't have her tears dabbed away immediately.

I'm pretty much with Mike, blood and/or bone, no brainer. I would add an obvious head injury, yeah, kill the play. Otherwise, play continues.

I wouldn't advise the runner of anything, just announce the award. And if I stopped the game for an injury, that player is going to need a substitute. I would remind the coach that the substitute may take the runners place and complete her running assignments.

It isn't a matter of "allowing" someone to benefit, but the offended team to play the game under the rules they elected to participate.

Just the play, not the hurt timeout. If the runner is called out based on abandonment or missing HP, isn't that between the bases where the OBS occurred?

Yes, but you know that committing a baserunning violation overrules the OBS.

Late to the Game
 

How can you call Obstruction and then bring Wreck into the conversation? Just asking as I've been having a discussion with a fellow umpire as to when and what is required for a wreck to be recognized?

I believe ASA has largely gone away from calling the "wreck" as much as they used to. It's either obstruction, interference, or nothing.

There's no such thing as a "wreck" as you are using it here.

if the PU announces the base awards to the runners as R1 is awarded home and R2 is awarded 2nd and R1 or her subsititute do not touch home, i dont see how you cannot call the runner out for abandonment-ASA 8-7-U. at that point in time, it should be apparent to everyone that the runner did not touch home during the play.

as to the injury discussion...
i was playing in a pretty large ASA SP D level tourny a few years ago, as im slowing into 3rd for a stand up triple, i tear my meniscus.... this happened literally 1 step from the base, i fall down, grab my knee (im off the base), the ball comes in, they tag me, ump calls me out and i agree with the call.

i believe according to the manual its either obs, int, or a collision. a collision being contact between players but neither obs nor int

If you ever call an out for abandonment on a play were a runner simply missed a base, please just quit. For that matter --- if you call an out for abandonment in ASA softball more than once in your career, hang em up. That is NOT what abandonment is.

The defense MUST appeal this miss of home to get an out.

Totally agree on this play. But at some point it's obvious enough that you don't need an appeal, right? Runner at third, catch and carry situation. Dead ball, you've got home. Goes straight to the dugout. How exactly should one handle that?
And if I'm right that this doesn't require an appeal, then where is the line.

Sorry, I don't have abandonment on that, either. Not truly different than a runner awarded third that cuts across the infield without touching second. Need an appeal, or the run scores as awarded.

"to leave completely and finally; forsake utterly; desert". In other words, giving up, I know (or think) I'm out. Not to be confused with I missed a base, something happened (like an injury) where I was distracted without touching the base, or (in your example) I didn't think I still had to touch that base since you awarded it.

One NFHS case example talks about a runner who over-runs first base, starts toward second, but "gives up" when a defensive player is chasing. Keep that thought process of "giving up" in your head, and runners that miss bases without that simply missed bases; even if the base they miss is home and they enter the team area.

I'm sure one of our esteemed experts will correct me with some bizarre situation... but I cannot imagine ANY situation where abandonment could be the correct call during a dead ball.

In this case, you awarded home, and they are required to run those bases correctly... but failing to touch (even grossly as in this case) is not a case of abandonment. Even the sitch you describe requires an appeal to call an out.

IMO, mind you this is based on nothing more than MY interpretation of the rules, if you announce an the runner is awarded home and they dont touch home, i dont see how its not abandonment. did the runner make an attempt to touch home? no, did the runner go to/stay in the dugout? yes. unless im missing something, why is that not abandonment?


mbcrowder, can you please explain a situation where you would call abandonment? thanks

Sure. 2 outs. Ball hit in the infield, safe at first but ball thrown to first anyway. Girl turns to the left (but is not making any effort to go to 2nd). All the idiots on the field yell to tag her, F3 tags her. BU rules safe but no one pays attention. F3 rolls the ball to the circle, defense leaves the field. BR heads to right field and someone brings her a glove.

In that sitch, I'd have abandonment (and likely, in this case, a very quiet one).

Basically - to me, if you have less than 2 outs, then in any case where you might think abandonment, you're going to get a LBR once the pitcher gets the ball anyway. Abandonment can happen in baseball more than softball, because for the most part, there's no real rule keeping the runners on the bases after the ball is sent to the pitcher. I've never actually had an abandonment call in softball - but can conceive of it in the case of there being 2 outs and the whole world thinks there are 3.

Re-read the rule that actually uses the word abandonment ... can you apply that rule during a dead ball? An awarded base is done during a dead ball. If the runner fails to do their baserunning duties, the defense must appeal to get an out.

rule 8: the batter runner and runner
section 7: the runner is out
part u: when a runner abandons a base and enters the team area or leaves live ball territory.

i see nothing regarding live ball or dead ball

help me understand how the OPs scenario is different than youngumps from post 26

Notice, that my post is not abandonment. I was asking if it might be a situation where we didn't need an appeal. Steve who you should listen to answered my question there. So they don't actually need to show a difference to get a different ruling because the ruling is the same.

It's not. Neither is it abandonment.

ok...

help me understand what the abandonment rule is bc i dont see how youngumps scenario, runner on 3rd, catch and carry, runner is awarded home but simply walks into the 3B dugout instead of running to home plate is not abandonment.

im not sure if im using an improper definition of abandonment or am envisioning something different in my head.

thanks

Try reading post #26 in this thread.

post 26 doesnt exactly give the definition of abandonment

Nor does Rule #1. A BR/R is never out for abandonment. They are out for entering DBT during a live ball. Period. That is it. It is all that an ASA umpire should take into consideration in ruling a runner out for what you call "abandonment".

You are right, it was late at night.

Try post #27.

im not the one calling it abandonment, the ASA rule 8-7-U is the one calling it abandonment. the rule makes no mention of it has to be a live ball.

let me try a different example. runner on 2nd, catch and carry, you award the runner 3rd base, but the runner for whatever reason, goes to their dugout instead. IMO, there are 3 possible scenarios. runner is out for abandonment, the defense appeals (i guess 3B) before the next pitch, or the defense does not appeal and you count the run.

clearly me definition of "abandons a base" is different than the rest of yours, im just trying to figure out why.

Can anything happen when the status of the ball is dead?

Assume you called time to work a lineup change, and the runner on 3B goes into her dugout during this time to get her ponytail holder. Gonna call her out for abandonment?

No ... it moved.

i see your point,

now what if its SP, and the runner stays in the dugout, and the ball is put back in play (and the defense doesnt appeal) are you going to count the run?

we can go back and forth on this scenarios, but what i really need is a the definition of "abandons a base" as per 8-7-U

You know, you can hang your hat on this, but the word "abandon" is a matter of the need of a word from the English language, but it is not a defined violation. The violation is for leaving LBT while the ball is live. And it must be a live ball.

Runner or Batter/Runner " leaving LBT while the ball is live."

(not a Batter)