Obstruction?

Panda Bear · #1 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 12:15am

Saw an unusual one in a LL District Champ. game tonight. Batter hits a roller between 1B & pitcher. Pitcher can't get there, First baseman fields it, and tries to go the line for the tag (too far up the line to get back to the bag). Batter runner is too fast, and is too far past the 1st. baseman for her to even try to get a tag. But the 1st. baseman's foot clips the runner's heel, causing her to fall. Subsequently, she is tagged out. The rule book defines obstruction as the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball, impedes the progress of the runner. NFHS similarly requires posseddion, the act of fielding, or, receiving the ball.

But if the fielder doesn't make a play, is it ok to trip the runner if you can't make a tag? It wasn't intentional in this case, but intent is clearly not a factor in obstruction. I can imagine a fielder diving for a ball near the path, being flat on the ground with the ball, no chance to make a play, but swinging a leg up to trip the passing runner. My inclination would be to declare obstruction if a fielder with the ball, but not making a play, takes out a runner. But I don't see the rules supporting that. If there is clear intent, USC, but if I'm not sure of the intent, I'm not going to go there.

I would like some of the esteemed senior members' opinions on this.

SC Ump · #2 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 04:31am

Not sure I understand the scenario properly but...

Sounds to me like either (a) the fielder was first making a play on the ball, and then once it was fielded, went into a mode of making vain attempts at trying to tag the runner, or (b) the fielder was fielding the ball and as completing that task accidently stepped on the batter runner's heel.

In either case, I do not see obstruction.

If however, the fielder intentionally tripped the runner as in your "I can imagine" statement, I would have USC. If the fielder was flailing about in a haphazard attempt to rollover or sit upright, I don't think I would have a call.

Either way, I bet your going have a coach griping.

18597 · #3 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 07:39am

There are two cases where a fielder with the ball can obstruct a runner. The case described is the first one; runner has no chance at a tag, but trips the runner. The second can occur when a runner in on a base and the fielder with the ball pushes the runner off the base and then tags them.

These two cases were emphasised at clinics this spring.

CecilOne · #4 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 07:54am

It seems to me that if (in the umpire's judgement) the only way a fielder can get an out is after the fielder tripped (impeded) the runner; then it has to be obstruction. This assumes the trip was by a body part other than the hand with the ball, like the foot in this example.

Dakota · #5 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 10:27am

Ooooooo doggies ... now you're in a pickle!

If the fielder was making a legitimate attempt at a play & while trying to run down the runner from behind clipped her heel of the runners backward stride with her forward stride, then I don't see obstruction. I do see an ejected offensive coach, however!

If the fielder was being clumsy and not making a legitimate play, then I can see an obstruction ruling, but the rules backup is weak. Probably won't get much grief from the defense with this call, since it would seem "fair."

If the fielder was intentionally tripping, then I see obstruction and ejection of the fielder.

While the obstruction definition, rule, and POE (ASA - I don't have LL rule books) all explicitly say a fielder "not in possession of the ball...", there is an underlying assumption that the fielder is playing the game legally. Tripping is not a legal defensive play.

CecilOne · #6 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 11:15am

I was going by "too far past the 1st. baseman for her to even try to get a tag".

But I like the memorial to Buddy Ebsen.

Dakota · #7 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 11:28am

Quote:

Originally posted by CecilOne
I was going by "too far past the 1st. baseman for her to even try to get a tag".

But I like the memorial to Buddy Ebsen.

...

IRISHMAFIA · #8 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 12:09pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Dakota
Ooooooo doggies ... now you're in a pickle!

If the fielder was making a legitimate attempt at a play & while trying to run down the runner from behind clipped her heel of the runners backward stride with her forward stride, then I don't see obstruction. I do see an ejected offensive coach, however!

If the fielder was being clumsy and not making a legitimate play, then I can see an obstruction ruling, but the rules backup is weak. Probably won't get much grief from the defense with this call, since it would seem "fair."

If the fielder was intentionally tripping, then I see obstruction and ejection of the fielder.

While the obstruction definition, rule, and POE (ASA - I don't have LL rule books) all explicitly say a fielder "not in possession of the ball...", there is an underlying assumption that the fielder is playing the game legally. Tripping is not a legal defensive play.

This play cannot be obstruction as the player has possession of the ball.

After the call is made and the "tripping is not a legal defensive play", the next question most likely will be, "and that is under what rule?"

If deemed an intentional act, I believe the proper response would be "Dead ball! Runner on 1B, F3 ejected for unsportsmanlike conduct." Otherwise, nothing, though I'm still finding it hard to believe that if they were close enough to get their short legs tangled, a possible tag is not out of the question.

BTW, and I have seen this before, a fielder with the ball, by rule, may place themselves between the base and an advancing runner. There is nothing which says the defender cannot slide between the two to prevent the runner from touching the base. If this happens, intentional or otherwise, the play and all subsequent action is legal.

Roger Greene · #9 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 12:22pm

I had a similar play in a baseball game (calm down, Mike) in which F5 gloved the ball with his left hand as the runner passed him and reached out with his right hand to grabb the runner's jersey, slowing him down sufficiently to apply the tag before he reached the base.

I aplied 9.01(c), the authority to rule on any point not covered by the rules, and placed the runner on 3rd. I did not eject F5 as this was smaller kidds (12 & under as I recall) and I don't think F5 had unsportsman like intent. It was just an untrained reaction.

The ruling may be pretty weak, but it satisified both coaches, and when later reported to more experienced umpires met with agreement with the provision that at upper levels the USC ejection would probably be warrented.

Roger Greene

(Too many mispelled words. Must proof before posting.)

[Edited by Roger Greene on Jul 16th, 2003 at 07:05 PM]

whiskers_ump · #10 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 02:25pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Panda Bear
Saw an unusual one in a LL District Champ. game tonight. Batter hits a roller between 1B & pitcher. Pitcher can't get there, First baseman fields it, and tries to go the line for the tag (too far up the line to get back to the bag). Batter runner is too fast, and is too far past the 1st. baseman for her to even try to get a tag. But the 1st. baseman's foot clips the runner's heel, causing her to fall. Subsequently, she is tagged out. The rule book defines obstruction as the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball, impedes the progress of the runner. NFHS similarly requires posseddion, the act of fielding, or, receiving the ball.

But if the fielder doesn't make a play, is it ok to trip the runner if you can't make a tag? It wasn't intentional in this case, but intent is clearly not a factor in obstruction. I can imagine a fielder diving for a ball near the path, being flat on the ground with the ball, no chance to make a play, but swinging a leg up to trip the passing runner. My inclination would be to declare obstruction if a fielder with the ball, but not making a play, takes out a runner. But I don't see the rules supporting that. If there is clear intent, USC, but if I'm not sure of the intent, I'm not going to go there.

I would like some of the esteemed senior members' opinions on this.

Not an esteemed senior member, but judging by this:

But the 1st. baseman's foot clips the runner's heel, causing her to fall. Subsequently, she is tagged out. If F3 close enough to trip her, seems close enough to tag her. HTBT..
Probably award BR 1B and eject F3.

JMHO
glen

Panda Bear · #11 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 16, 2003, 03:06pm

Appreciate the insights. Just to clarify Mr. Rowe & papasmurf's observations (and others), it was a HTBT play, but left handed 1st. baseman, so ball in glove in right hand, runner leaving to the left. Could the fielder have made a dive or have chosen a different angle? Possibly. For whatever reason, she didn't manage to make a play, we just had a fielder, who happened to have a ball, running into a runner.

I like Mr. Greene's thoughts, both citing 9.01(c), and not ejecting, for kids especially, when it is apparent that the fielder's inexperience met a split second decision opportunity. I realize part of our responsibility as umpires are all the things that fall under 9.01(c), but I like to have a better rule reference whenever possible.

Tom "Dakota"'s observation "... there is an underlying assumption that the fielder is playing the game legally" I find probably applies to a number of rules. However, in this era of creative thinking and diminished sportsmanship on the part of a few, I'm noticing more situations coming up that seem to have not occurred to the rule writers (all codes). The rules are written under assumptions that may not be valid in some situations. I think the challenge with the combination of this and umpires' judgement (9.01 again) is unintentional inconsistancy.

CecilOne · #12 (**permalink**) Thu Jul 17, 2003, 07:43am

Quote:

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
... snip ...
This play cannot be obstruction as the player has possession of the ball.
... snip ...

Of course, sorry I wasn't visualizing accurately

18597 · #13 (**permalink**) Thu Jul 17, 2003, 07:59am

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
... snip ...
This play cannot be obstruction as the player has possession of the ball.
... snip ...

Unless you are north of the border.

Softball Canada Rule 1 section 52.

c. A fielder with possesion of the ball may cause obstruction by:
1) Pushing a runner off base;
2) Impeding the progress of a runner while not in the act of making a play on the runner.

For my American friends, a question. Given that ASA precludes obstruction by a fielder in posession of the ball. What does you call when a fielder pushes a runner off base and tags them? USC and eject ?

mick · #14 (**permalink**) Thu Jul 17, 2003, 08:22am

Quote:

Originally posted by 18597
What does you call when a fielder pushes a runner off base and tags them? USC and eject ?

18597,
Judgement (on degree of contact) call:

Smile and safe,

Sell and out

Stare and warn,

Unsporting and eject.

mick

18597 · #15 (**permalink**) Thu Jul 17, 2003, 08:54am

quote:
Originally posted by 18597

What does you call when a fielder pushes a runner off base and tags them? USC and eject ?

quote:

Originally posted by mick

18597,
Judgement (on degree of contact) call:
# Smile and safe,
# Sell and out
# Stare and warn,
# Unsporting and eject.

mick,

Philosophically, while I don't disagree with your answer, what rule(s) are you applying for for (1) Smile and safe or (3) Stare and warn.

I don't have an ASA rulebook, but from my understanding of the way the rules are written, they only provide for 2) Sell and out or 4) Unsporting and eject.