Another question for Bretman

[default]

NCAA game today ... am 99% sure this is what happened, but forgot to ask the coach after the game as there was a conference between him and the umpires after the play. Runners on 2nd and 3rd, one out. Solid base hit up the middle, runner on 2nd collides with shortstop who is not in the process of making a play on the ball. Umpire signals obstruction (I think that is what it's called ... delayed dead ball, right?), runner originally at 2nd continues on and is tagged out at the plate. There is no question in my mind that she would have scored had there not been the obstruction but I guess she only was entitled to 3rd base and continued on at her own risk?? There is no provision for a judgment call here from the umpire that she would have scored, or no choice by the offensive team to put her back on 3B? If not, should I assume this is the rule at pretty much all levels of baseball and softball?

 

[default]

NCAA game today ... am 99% sure this is what happened, but forgot to ask the coach after the game as there was a conference between him and the umpires after the play. Runners on 2nd and 3rd, one out. Solid base hit up the middle, runner on 2nd collides with shortstop who is not in the process of making a play on the ball. Umpire signals obstruction (I think that is what it's called ... delayed dead ball, right?), runner originally at 2nd continues on and is tagged out at the plate. There is no question in my mind that she would have scored had there not been the obstruction but I guess she only was entitled to 3rd base and continued on at her own risk?? There is no provision for a judgment call here from the umpire that she would have scored, or no choice by the offensive team to put her back on 3B? If not, should I assume this is the rule at pretty much all levels of baseball and softball?

Certainly bretman will answer and I could be wrong, but I believe the umpire puts the runner where he thinks she would have been without the obstruction. Yes, she is not protected between third and home, but unless she was out by 20 feet or more, then I don't see how in the world you don't give her home. The benefit of any doubt at all should go to the non-offending team, in this case the offense.

That play you mentioned, I have seen it twice in the past two years. Runner on second, ground ball up middle, slightly to left side. Shortstop is running to her left and collides with runner coming from second. I have seen it called obstruction and interference, depending upon whether the umpire thought the shortstop had a play. It's a pretty tough obstruction call because the shortstop is doing the right thing in going after the ball. Unless that ball is almost on the other side of second base, I have a tough time calling obstruction because the shortstop is "making a play" on the ball, even if she might not be able to get to it.

 

[default]

Joe pretty much answered the question (though I do have one small issue with part of his answer ).

An obstructed runner can be awarded any base that the umpire judges she would have safely reached, absent the obstruction. So it would be entirely possible for the runner from second on this play to be awarded home. This is true for NCAA, ASA, NFHS, NSA and all the rest.

Personally, if the tag play at home was anything even remotely close I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the runner. If she is tagged out on a close play, we have a dead ball and then the runner is awarded home. But that's not a sure thing in all cases. The variable is what the individual umpire saw and how he judged it and that can vary from one person to the next.

Generally, the runner has a right to run the bases and the fielder has a right to field the ball, but there are times when one or the other has the right of way. This is where I have a slight issue with part of Joe's answer:

"Unless that ball is almost on the other side of second base, I have a tough time calling obstruction because the shortstop is "making a play" on the ball, even if she might not be able to get to it."

For it to NOT be obstruction, the fielder has to be in the act of fielding a batted ball. That means that there has to be some reasonable chance of the ball actually being fielded. If the fielder isn't able to get to it, then she is NOT in the act of fielding the ball. Just moving in the direction of the ball isn't enough to satisfy the requirement of being "in the act of fielding".

I've had this play in my games a few times and it is one where you have to make a quick judgment call. One that sticks out in my mind from last year was a runner on second and a line drive hit directly over second base. The runner and fielder collided maybe 15-20 feet off the bag and the collision happened just as the ball was about over second base. The defensive coach pleaded for an interference call on the runner, claiming that his fielder was "in the act of fielding the ball". Well, she was kind of heading in that direction... But there was zero chance of her being anywhere close to even getting a glove on that ball- unless she had twenty foot long arms!

Speaking of strange calls in college games...did anyone see the Ohio State-Purdue game today? There was a case of a runner interfering with a thrown ball- one of the most obvious and blatant such interferences I've ever seen. This runner reached up over her head and very deliberately swatted a thrown ball away from a fielder. The runner was called out, but apparently the umpires never called a dead ball and let the other runner on base continue advancing. The lead runner swatted the ball as she approached home plate, while the trailing runner was just hitting second base. Yet at the the end of the play the trail runner had advanced to third and the umpires let her stay there. The announcers seemed pretty clueless as to what had happened. For the life of me, I can't figure out why the runner wasn't returned to second, which was the last base she had touched at the time of the interference.

 

[default]

In this case, I did not actually see the collision, but my recollection was that the ball was a clean hard single way out of reach of any infielders and I do know that the umpire in the field did call for obstruction anyhow, so that's not the issue here. The runner did not slide at home and was tagged out on the step before touching home plate. We actually run ruled the opponent this game, so the run was not significant, but the call did not make sense to me and I wanted to understand it for future reference. Without having an instant replay to see exactly what happened again, sounds to me like the umpire erred and cost us at least that one run. Also sounds like this is the rule at all levels of baseball and softball??

 

[default]

Without having an instant replay to see exactly what happened again, sounds to me like the umpire erred and cost us at least that one run. Also sounds like this is the rule at all levels of baseball and softball??

While the baseball and softball rules do have some different wrinkles on calling obstruction, this is one point that they all do agree on: Umpires can place obstructed runners on ANY base they determine necessary to negate the effects of the obstruction.

The only way this was the right call was if the umpire judged that the runner would not have scored, even without the obstruction. Without seeing the play, and without "getting into the head" of the person who made the call, your guess is as good as mine if this was a good judgment call or not.

Think of the difference between a runner barely brushing against a fielder and never breaking stride, versus a runner getting plowed over and knocked to the ground. They're both obstruction. The only difference is that the base award at the end of the play might be different, because one of these runners was prevented from advancing further than the other one.

Whatever happened in your game probably lies somewhere in between those two extremes. That's where individual umpire judgment comes into play.

 

[default]

Thanks, Bretman ... that makes sense ... will talk to the coach maybe at next game to find out what he was told ... but this is very helpful to me in terms of my own coaching knowledge ...

 

[default]

The other part to remember here is that if the runner has to keep advancing to the next base for the obstruction call to be awarded and the out overturned. If, for example, the obstruction occurs between 3rd and home and the runner retreats back to third after getting knocked down, the umpire will not automatically award the runner home as she retreated on her own.

 

[default]

I agree with you, bretman, that the fielder has to be in the act of fielding a batted ball, but if the fielder has even a .0001% chance of fielding that ball, then I don't think obstruction can be called. There literally has to be a 0% chance of her fielding the batted ball, which is why I say the ball had better be on the other side of second base unless it's just a rocket up the middle or already by the shortstop on the ground.

 

[default]

The other part to remember here is that if the runner has to keep advancing to the next base for the obstruction call to be awarded and the out overturned. If, for example, the obstruction occurs between 3rd and home and the runner retreats back to third after getting knocked down, the umpire will not automatically award the runner home as she retreated on her own.

It's not automatic that she would get home, but it's not automatic that she would get third either, just because she retreated after getting obstructed.

There's no rule that a runner actually has to try for an advanced base before she can be awarded it. Again, the award can be to ANY base the umpire judges will negate the effect of the obstruction. That might be the next base, or the next two bases, or even the one the runner just paseed, depending on the circumstances of the play.

For instance...

Ball is hit to the outfield. Runner is obstructed while rounding third base. She falls down and hurts her knee. Meanwhile, the outfielder is just now getting the ball near the fence. The relay throw finally comes in as the runner manages to crawl back to third base.

If the umpire judges that the runner would have scored without the obstruction, it doesn't matter if she actually tried to reach home or that she went back to third base. She should be awarded home once the play is over.

Take the same obstruction at third base, but with the ball in the infield at the time it happened. Since there would be little chance of a runner scoring from third with the ball in the infield, the runner shouldn't be awarded an advanced base. She would be placed on third at the end of the play.

On both plays you have the runner being obstructed in exactly the same manner, stopping her advance to home and retreating back to third base. The difference in the base award is the circumstances surrounding the play. In one case, the runner most likely would have scored so she gets the advanced base. In the other, she most likely would not have scored, so she isn't awarded the advanced base.

 

[default]

Talked with Coach about this last night. There was no debate about whether the fielder had a play on the ball or not ... everyone agreed that there was an obstruction. The debate was about whether the obstruction was enough to have caused the runner to be out at the plate. The umpire who called the obstruction didn't feel it did, while Coach disagreed. While I didn't see the obstruction myself, I did see where she was tagged out and I don't know how anyone could have determined that any obstruction whatsoever would not have made a difference in the out at the plate. Like I said above, it didn't affect the ultimate outcome of the game, but I did learn something for future reference.

 

[default]

Question,
Batter the DH get a hit 2nd inning, pinch runner comes in. 3 innings later batter comes back in her same spot in the order and gets another hit. Other team complains she was not reported back in the game. Coach said she reported after 2nd inning and umpire didn't write it down, Umpire said he didn't remember, he calls her out.
My question, is she out or coach should have gotten a warning for not reporting and she should have stayed on first?

 

[default]

She is out. You don't get warnings or do overs.

 

[default]

And another question for my information only.

Runners on 1st and 3rd. Batter strikes out and catcher drops the ball on 3rd strike, runner takes off for 1st base but it is occupied. No throw attempt was made by catcher but opposing coach comes out of duggout yelling that runner on 3rd is out because batter was trying to decieve the catcher to make the throw which could have advanced runner home to score. Umpire did not call anyone out except for the batter and game went on.....until after the game when parents followed umpire to parking lot and reamed him for about 10 minutes where he politely told them where the umpire classes were given and he would be happy to see them at a few games wearing blue. ;&

Was the call by the umpire the correct call?

 

[default]

People followed the ump into the parking lot for this?

When 1st base is occupied on dropped 3rd, batter is out. End of story. The batter can run all the way to the outfield fence if she wants - doesn't change anything. It's hard to believe that anybody who labels themself as a "coach" would actually try to get an out because of what was perceived as someone's deceptive intentions...

 

[default]

Not about us ... both the coach and the players are responsible for knowing the rules, and to not be deceived when a batter does this. There is no penalty for this kind of deception and it's really scary that the umpire was chased to the parking lot about this ... wow ...

 

[default]

Question,
Batter the DH get a hit 2nd inning, pinch runner comes in. 3 innings later batter comes back in her same spot in the order and gets another hit. Other team complains she was not reported back in the game. Coach said she reported after 2nd inning and umpire didn't write it down, Umpire said he didn't remember, he calls her out.
My question, is she out or coach should have gotten a warning for not reporting and she should have stayed on first?

There's all kinds of wrong here...

First question: What santioning body? There could be some different answers for high school, ASA, USSSA, etc.

1) Neither high school or ASA uses a "DH" (designated hitter?). They do use a "DP" (designated player) and a FLEX (flex player), but those rules are completely different than using a designated hitter.

2) There's not really any such thing as a "pinch runner" in softball rules. You can have a courtesy runner, a substitution or if this was actually the DP the FLEX could have been used to run. All of these are different in the way it might be reported.

3) If the coach really did report the re-entry, but the umpire didn't write it down, then that umpire has a problem. Keeping track of the line-ups is one of our responsibilities. The umpire is also supposed to report the change to the other team's scorekeeper. I see a lot of umpires that don't bother to do any of that. Most of the time, there won't be any issues and you can slide by. But if there is a substitution issue, a re-entry question or a batting out of order appeal....now you have a big problem! How are you going to make a ruling if you haven't been keeping track?

4) "Umpire said he didn't remember (reporting the sub"). Duh. That's why they make pencils and line-up cards that you can carry in that handly little ball bag hanging on your waist...

5) Umpire calls the player out: NO! In high school and ASA ball, an unreported sub is NOT called out. In high school, a team warning is to be issued. The sub is then in the game, same as if she had been reported. there is no further penalty. ASA doesn't even require the team warning. You just add the player to the line-up card and play on- no penalty!

 

[default]

This was a very good rivalry game where the opposing team was up by 5 runs but dd's team rallied back in the 6th inning and won. But regardless of the outcome, everyone was shocked that a couple parents acted like they did.

I have never heard an umpire call "Runner, your OUT for deception!" LOL, but everyone kind of questioned what was going on because opposing coach has had his position for a lot of years, is respected and doesn't usually say much to the umpires. It kind of made me stop and think...hmmm...alrighty then... and, where is a rule book when you just have to know.

 

[default]

Bretman,

My bad it was HS and it was a DP and that was my understanding of the rule I just didn't have rule book at the time. I'll let are coach know she was right. And by the way this was a first year varsity Umpire but I will give him credit his stirke zone was the same the whole game and he did come up after the game and said he was sorry for not writing it down.

Thanks Bretman

 

[default]

And another question for my information only.

Runners on 1st and 3rd. Batter strikes out and catcher drops the ball on 3rd strike, runner takes off for 1st base but it is occupied. No throw attempt was made by catcher but opposing coach comes out of duggout yelling that runner on 3rd is out because batter was trying to decieve the catcher to make the throw which could have advanced runner home to score. Umpire did not call anyone out except for the batter and game went on.....until after the game when parents followed umpire to parking lot and reamed him for about 10 minutes where he politely told them where the umpire classes were given and he would be happy to see them at a few games wearing blue. ;&

Was the call by the umpire the correct call?

Sounds like he got it right.

The batter running on a third strike, when she's not entitled to advance to first base, in not in and of itself interference. Deception? Maybe, I don't know. The rule doesn't mention anything about the word "deception" and whether it's deceptive or not really isn't a factor in making this call. If the defense was deceived, then that's on them. They need to recognize the situation and know enough to not make an unecessary throw.

The only way this can be interference is if the retired batter's presence on the field actually in some way impedes the defense from retiring another viable runner. For instance, if the runner on first was off the bag and trying to get back, and the catcher actually did throw down to make a play on her, and there was some reasonable possibility that an out might have been recorded, but the throw hit the retired batter, then you would have a case of interference. And, since this would be interference by a retired player, the penalty would be to call out the runner closest to home- the runner on third base.

But apparently none of that happened. Generally, interference can only be called when an actual out is in some way prevented by the offense. They're penalized with an out because their actions prevented an out. If there was no out to be had, then you can't have interference. Even if the catcher did throw the ball, if the throw wasn't part of a legitimate play that could result in an out, all you have is bad move by the catcher. You couldn't say that the throw was part of an effort to retire the batter- because she is already out!

This certainly isn't the first time I've heard of a coach trying to "get a free out", even with a totally bogus argument. Unfortunately, it isn't the first time I've heard of an umpire being accosted after a game, either- even when his call was 100% the right one. I've been in those shoes a few times myself.

 

[default]

Ok, last Sunday, 2nd game of OSU-Purdue double-header. Purdue has runner on 1st and 3rd base, no outs. On the pitch, runner on 1st base attempts a steal of second base, catcher makes throw toward 2nd base but the throw is cut-off by the 2nd baseman who throws to 3rd base and cuts-off that runner. OSU then gets the runner that was on 3rd base in a run-down. The 3rd baseman chases the runner toward home and then throws to the catcher. The runner reaches up and intentionally (no doubt about whether is was intentional) swats the ball, altering the path of the throw. The throw is missed by the catcher and the runner then runs into the catcher. Runner that was on first base now rounds third base and runs toward home and crosses the plate.

Umpire calls the first runner out for intentionally interfering with a throw. The second runner is put back on 3rd base.

Ok, the umps got it half-right. Apparently, we might need to have instant replay in college softball. OSU challenges the decision, very politely of course, that the second runner is put on 3rd base. The replay (BTN) shows that when the interference occurred, the runner had not yet reach 3rd base but the umpire crew was not paying attention. They still kept the runner on 3rd base.