Sam,
Exactly what I meant. Thanks.

Yes, I understood that, which is why I said "not quite", instead of "no". I understand the feeling of wanting to penalize for deliberate obstruction, but disagree, mostly because the runner didn't earn the next base and it would make some umpires even more reluctant to call it. The intent would be very hard to judge, especially since younger players and many HS players are not very well trained on footwork. Besides, LL rules are based on 10-12 year old players in a win-at-all-costs environment and most of us are working with higher age levels.

I don't think the bigger problem right now is umpires being reluctant to call it. I think the bigger problem (around here, anyway, in JO ball, anyway) is umpires either not looking for it, or umpires ignorant of the rule. I'm also not sure that requiring the next base is the right adjustment, either. Maybe something like allowing the umpire the option of awarding the next base if in his judgment the behavior was deliberate. I don't know... I haven't really thought it through much, except to note that it is becoming so prevalent that it is obvious to me it is coached.

What??? LL??? I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you!

Actually...
 

Little league rules are mostly a direct rewrite of MLB's Official Baseball Rules with a few modifications for safety and pitching rules. So they are really based on 18-40 yr. old win or lose your job mentality.

But I would still like to see SOME penalty for delibretly obstructing a runner.

SamC

Some lowdown coaches may teach fielders to get in the way of runners. But virtually all the obstruction I see derives from lack of baseball instinct. Infielders not directly involved in a play often simply stand nailed to a spot, so obstruction is a major topic these days. It was not even on the table when LL was made up mostly of kids who played sandlot baseball all day every day during the summer. I have seen more instances of obstruction in one JV softball game than I did in my entire playing career.

I agree that lack of skill accounts for a lot of obstruction, too. But I'm not just talking about fielders being in the way. I'm talking about fielders dropping a knee down to block the base on a pick off attempt; fielders standing at the inside corner of 2B or outside of 3B to take away the natural path of a full-speed runner; what appears to be deliberately taught defensive positioning.

Yes, those moves are a concern. We can award the next base as our judgement of the base the runner would have reached when they are moving forward. It's the pickoffs and other returns to the current base that have no award in the rules. I guess that's why the OBR and LL award the next base, but I'm still against it as long as the runner is protected and hasn't done anything to earn the next base. I assume the OBR/LL award is not based on intent and that is a problem with their rule.

<b>Some lowdown coaches may teach fielders to get in the way of runners</b>

I see that all the time and I KNOW it is coached. I don't refer to the coaches as lowdown though. They are playing within the rules and if that get's them an out, then so be it.

Do I think it should be coached at the youth levels...NO....However once you hit 18-U Gold then sure, because the college scouts/coaches are looking for it.

The penalty for obstruction is that you cannot put that runner out.

Yes, before Fed changed their rule, umpires hesitated to rule obstruction on pick-off attempts. Been there, seen that happen on the field.

It's no different than when you hear "she gained no advantage" when an umpire doesn't call an illegal pitch. It's an excuse because that umpire doesn't want to start moving runners around the bases.

I do not agree with nor practice that, but I can certainly understand it because I don't agree with the penalty for an illegal pitch. I believe it should be a ball or manager's option should the ball be put into play. For you baseball folks who believe balk/illegal pitch are the same thing, you are wrong. A balk affects the runners in baseball while an illegal pitch has absolutely nothing to do with the runners.

That is just personal opinion which means absolutely nothing when I'm on the field.

If an umpire doesn't rule obstruction when they see it, blame the umpire, not the rule.

I do not know about the rest of you but once the first baseman puts a leg down in front of the bag at ANY level (pickoff throw from catcher and does not have the ball), my arm comes up for the obstruction call and the defense is not getting an out. I've had it at third base too.

Coaches who teach that are hoping umpires will miss the call and give them the out. The coaches know they are not to block the bag like that so for me it adds an aspect of cheating. What has allowed it to ocurr is umpires failing to enforce the award (old fed rule) or not calling the obstruction. Call it and when they came out to ask for an explanation, tell em what would you want called if the other team did it (just kidding). Tell what you saw and it will be called all day while you are on the field. They will do it untill all umpires stop allowing it. It reflects negatively on the character of the coach who teaches this in MHO.

It's not within the rules to block the bag.

I saw this at lower levels of elite ball in Texas but do not recall it out of the 18U gold teams in the Houston area. The umps that did those games knew the play and made the call. No out and when it was in effect in Fed, we awarded the next base. The coaches I knew were aware of the rule and expected the umpires to enforce it.

Teaching fielders to stand on the inside corner of 2B to slow the natural path of the runner is cheating, not gaining an advantage within the rules. It's not like setting a pick in basketball. At higher levels, especially in baseball, the runner will simply bowl the guy over. And if a player cheats that way in baseball and the umps don't call it, he will get nailed the next time he bats. Of course, that's not within the rules, either, but it is the main barrier to the many kinds of cheating that the umpires can seldom detect.

I would like to see a base award for intentional obstruction, like putting a knee down at 1B on a runner returning. It already exists in baseball.

[Edited by greymule on Mar 6th, 2003 at 01:22 PM]

Large vs. Smallball Obstruction Difference
 

As some of you are probably aware, and others have noted, there is a difference in the obstruction penalty/rules for softball and baseball (NFHS)

Softball says 8-4-3 Penalty 3. "... will always be awarded the base or bases which would have been reached, in the umpire's judgement, had there been no obstruction." And that's the end of it.

Baseball adds 8-3-2 "... the umpire shall award the obstructed runner and each other runner affected by the obstruction the bases they would have reached, in his opinion, had there been no obstruction. The obstructed runner is awarded a minimum of one base beyond his position on base when the obstruction occurred.

For my money, these two phrases in the baseball rules don't agree. A player returning to a base when he is obstructed... the first half of the rules says he gets that base. The second phrase says he gets advanced beyond the base last reached.

If any rule change is made to the Softball rules this ambiguity needs to removed. JMHO

I'm posting a similar thread in the Baseball forum. Perhaps some of that discussion might be relevant.

You mean ONLY in baseball, don't you? Bowl over a player in softball and you should be done for the night. And now, it seems, in ASA the runner will also be ruled out for doing something so stupid.

But in some baseball it is permissible to block the bag if the ball is on it's way. Nonetheless, like I've stated before, simply call the obstruction, leave the runner there and call the coach to the field and tell her/him the next time it happens, s/he loses F3. I think that will take care of the problem, it always has for me.

<b>At higher levels, especially in baseball, the runner will simply bowl the guy over.

You mean ONLY in baseball, don't you? Bowl over a player in softball and you should be done for the night. And now, it seems, in ASA the runner will also be ruled out for doing something so stupid.</b>

What I meant was that in, say, high-level SP, the runners keep running hard and don't slow down or run around fielders who are in their way. They don't deliberately run people over, but they're not programmed to slow down or avoid and will collide and get the call. We've all seen runners charge around 2B head down and crash into F6. This is as opposed to most girls' play, where runners will slow down or go around fielders. I've even had runners stop, look at me, and say, "She's in my way!"

Whether USC results in outs in ASA is still up in the air, I thought. In any case, I've seen plenty of accidental, hard-charging collisions that I wouldn't call USC. Of course, I would eject on an obviously intentional crash.

Should we really give the signal before the contact occurs? Even with the fielder blocking, there is no obstruction if the runner reaches around or over and is safe without the obstructon penalty.