Obstruction or Not?

[snoman76]

Runner on 2nd, hard ground ball to SS, 6-3 out at 1. F3 fires back to F5. Throw pulls F5 off the base 2 steps directly in line with the runner coming from 22d. F5 catches the ball a split second before runner reaches her. Runner slides to avoid plowing over F5 but is way short of the base due to F5 being pulled from the throw. Is she out or is she safe due to obstruction?

 

[tjsmize3]

Dave,
The way I understand the rule you would have to know if the runner was forced to alter her path to the base by sliding (or otherwise) BEFORE or AFTER F5 caught the ball. If the runner had to slide BEFORE F5 caught the ball because F5 was in her way of getting to the base (irregardless of why) then you would have to call obstruction. If in the umpires judgement the runner did not have to alter her path to the base (by sliding or otherwise) until AFTER F5 had caught the ball then it is an out.
I always seem to be on the wrong side of these arguments in games, but that is how I would be approaching my discussion with blue in a game situation.

 

[snoman76]

This was such a bang bang play that I guess if they ruled obstruction I would live with it. I guess if we are on defense the fielder should have the right of way to the ball and if we are on offense the runner has the right. That's exactly how the rule should be.

 

[Hilliarddad3]

Just curiosity question here is all.....does a fielder have a right to an errant throw as a batted ball?

 

[Comp]

Just curiosity question here is all.....does a fielder have a right to an errant throw as ugh as a batted ball?

No, the only time a fielder has a right to the ball is on the initial play of a batted ball.

 

[tjsmize3]

This was such a bang bang play that I guess if they ruled obstruction I would live with it. I guess if we are on defense the fielder should have the right of way to the ball and if we are on offense the runner has the right. That's exactly how the rule should be.

Lol... I use the same rule with a tie at 1st base... safe if were bating, out if we're on defense.

 

[snoman76]

Just curiosity question here is all.....does a fielder have a right to an errant throw as a batted ball?

That was my question yesterday. Obviously the fielders are concentrating on catching/stopping the ball and they have no idea where the runner is. They may have somewhat of a sense but they are focused on the ball. This is one of those rules that will make 50% happy and leave the other 50% pissed.

 

[Louuuuu]

The runner would have a better chance of selling an obstruction call if they would have veered out of the base line or had a little incidental contact with F5 instead of sliding without being close enough to reach the base. Otherwise, it just looks like "you slid - you were tagged - you're out." Which, granted - on a bang bang play - who has time to think of all this?

 

[longball00]

Dave, I saw that play yesterday from the 3rd baseline. The runner did have to alter her path to avoid the defender, AND the defender did have to move to the position she was in to get to the errant throw. The question is, as asked above, does the defender have the right to the throw. Tough call for having one umpire. The funny part is, when it was questioned, the ump seemed to look out into the field for help from his non existent partner out of habit LOL!

 

[Bullbuck]

This would seem to be a no-call. Based on the facts given, it's not interference (not a batted ball and no indication baserunner intended to interfere) and it's not obstruction (fielder was making a play on the ball). It sounds like a simple collision instead, so just play on.

 

[Hilliarddad3]

That was my question yesterday. Obviously the fielders are concentrating on catching/stopping the ball and they have no idea where the runner is. They may have somewhat of a sense but they are focused on the ball. This is one of those rules that will make 50% happy and leave the other 50% pissed.

Never pissed, just tell the girls ok, get your gloves, play on, plays over, look forward at the next play........

 

[longball00]

This would seem to be a no-call. Based on the facts given, it's not interference (not a batted ball and no indication baserunner intended to interfere) and it's not obstruction (fielder was making a play on the ball). It sounds like a simple collision instead, so just play on.

There was no collision. The runner attempted to slide to avoid contact and make the base, and ended up short based on the path taken, and how early she had to get down.

 

[tjsmize3]

Oldest DD plays 3rd base in college so from time to time these issues come up. She was playing a college game where ball was hit to center fielder on the ground and base runner came around 2nd base going to 3rd. CF throws to 3rd and DD steps into position to catch and tag. Base runner slides to the back of the bag and DD tags her well before she got to it. Girl called safe. Coach appeals and looses. Explanation: Fielder does not have the right to be in the baseline until she HAS POSSESSION of the ball. I would think same thing applies here. Where's SoCal on this...

 

[mogsoftball]

It all comes down to timing and ump judgement.

If the fielder recieves the ball a split second before as the runner goes into a slide you will not get the call, if the runner does not alter their path to the base then you are unlikely to get the call. If the runner has to alter path or slow down and its obvious this is the reason the fielder was able to catch the ball in time and make the tag you should get the call.

In the NCAA rule book I believe there is an additional sectiuon to the rule

"On the other hand, the fielder cannot block the base line without the ball or "not in the immediate act of catching the ball". (NCAA Rule 12.14.1)"

that little extra allows for the fielder to move into the baseline if it is to make an immediate catch of the ball, but ASA doesn't have that stipulation.

 

[snoman76]

Dave, I saw that play yesterday from the 3rd baseline. The runner did have to alter her path to avoid the defender, AND the defender did have to move to the position she was in to get to the errant throw. The question is, as asked above, does the defender have the right to the throw. Tough call for having one umpire. The funny part is, when it was questioned, the ump seemed to look out into the field for help from his non existent partner out of habit LOL!

RIGHT! I started laughing. He walked out into the infield and started looking around.. I almost said something jokingly but decided not to. That was pretty funny.

Either way he called it I didn't care much, its a friendly.

 

[BretMan2]

Oldest DD plays 3rd base in college so from time to time these issues come up. She was playing a college game where ball was hit to center fielder on the ground and base runner came around 2nd base going to 3rd. CF throws to 3rd and DD steps into position to catch and tag. Base runner slides to the back of the bag and DD tags her well before she got to it. Girl called safe. Coach appeals and looses. Explanation: Fielder does not have the right to be in the baseline until she HAS POSSESSION of the ball. I would think same thing applies here. Where's SoCal on this...

NCAA softball has a different rule than the other amateur sanctioning bodies. They do allow a fielder to block a base if she's taking a position to receive a throw.

What I can't tell you is exactly how they interpret that and how they instruct their umpires to call it. For instance, I'm not certain if the fielder needs to be set up in one spot taking the throw (versus moving into the runner's path to get an errant throw).

Also, I believe in the past they defined "about to receive the throw" as the ball being closer to the fielder than the runner. That is, if the fielder is blocking the base, but the ball is still (pick a number) 50 feet away, that's not legitimately "receiving the throw".

 

[SoCal_Dad]

@tj - The umpire's explanation doesn't sound right if DD didn't impede the runner before catching the ball. If the runner showed some sign of being impeded by DD blocking the base without the ball, it could be a legit call.

"Immediate act of catching the ball" only appears once in the NCAA rule book and that is in the 12.13 Collisions section. The rest of the rules used to say "about to receive" and they've been changed in the new rule book for 2016-17 (see below).

Obstruction
The committee made a small change in the wording of the obstruction rule, but expects to see fewer defenders blocking their bases sooner than they are entitled to. The specific wording replaces ?about to receive a thrown ball? with ?in the act of catching a thrown ball.? Players and umpires will no longer have to judge if the ball is closer to the base than the runner is, but instead whether the defender was positioning herself (not protected) or in the act of receiving the throw (protected). Although not new to the rule, in order for obstruction to be called, note that the runner must be impeded in some way such as by altering her course to the base or by being denied direct access to the base. Blocking access to the base with no noticeable effect on a runner remains a ?no call.?