Here we go agian-umpire/baserunning

[default]

Bases loaded, no one out. Wild pitch goes to backstop(DEEP backstop, multi-use field). Runner from third runs home, pitcher is in left side batters box/straddling line, probably foot and a half from home. Runner takes her out, catcher is still in process of getting ball. Ump calls dead ball, calls out runner, ejects her, makes other two runnners return to thier bases, and then screams at coach about player safety. Rules are supposed to be standard OSHAA. As I see it(but I am sure I will be corrected) fielder without ball was impeding runner with no right to do so; if runner slides she will be contacting fielder still a good foot from home, so she would need to slide and then do WHAT to actually touch the plate if she is supposed to have no contact with fielder....My opinion call was insane, umpire is a moron, but again I am sure I am wrong;&

 

[default]

If a fielder is blocking a base to impede a runner (ie: committing obstruction) and the runner plows the fielder (ie: commits interference), the obstruction is ignored and the interference call takes precedence.

The runner still needs to avoid contact. If she can't reach the base because she was obstructed, then she is awared the base on the obstruction call.

Still...unless the runner did something "malicious" (which is defined as using excessive force against an opponent) she should not have been ejected. If she was simply running to the base in an attempt to aquire it, it could have been interference, dead ball, other runners return. The "malicious-ness" of the contact is up to the umpire's judgment.

So, while the ejection is a variable here, the interference, the dead ball, the out and the other runners beimg returned to the last base touched is not. That's the correct penalty for interference.

PS: The umpire "screaming at the coach" is over the top and uncalled for. No need to scream at anybody. Just make the call you have, then explain it if asked.

 

[default]

The rule states slide or avoid contact, but that is when the defensive player has the ball.

That simply is not true.

Rule 8-4-3(b): Should an act of interference occur following any obstruction, enforcement of the interference penalty would have precedence.

 

[default]

Help me out here. I thought blocking the base or plate without the ball was considered obstruction. If you try to run around her and end up out, if there was no contact, then you are out of luck.

No, if the fielder doesn't have the ball and that causes the runner to have to go around her, the obstructed runner isn't "out of luck". She is awarded the base!

Contact is NOT a requirement of either interference or obstruction.

I'm not doubting that an umpire has told you this before. What I'm saying is what he told you was wrong.

 

[default]

I could listen to Bretman speak about the rules of the game all day.

I wish I could carry a "mini Bret" with me at all times.

I recently had a female coach (my wife coaches but at times the coaches that played fastpitch in college feel they know the game and rules better than anyone....annoying) tell me that if my player does not pull her bat back it is a strike and it has been for the 15 years she played. I commented back that while true it is not always true(depends on the sanctioning body)..............so I had to forward her the Bretman disertation on how this rule has only been around 3-5 years. And that ASA still makes the umpire decide if an attempt was made.

I actually did it in a way that was not be a know it all...............LOL. We talked after she read the Bretman explanation and she was surprised.

It would be cool if there was some type of "RULES" clinic for coaches to attend. It is amazing how many coaches still do not get the concept of the LBR.

 

[default]

The local baseball and softball league where I work games does offer a coach's rules clinic every season. This league has over 100 total teams!

Last year, eight coaches showed up.

Some people just figure that if they already know it all...why bother...

 

[default]

Sounds like this is very similar to the recent "blocking first base" thread. I think the key concern is getting an umpire to call it correctly - especially with no contact.

Just another reason why we truly need the "BretClone" machine!!

 

[default]

Bretman - I am not sure where you are, but I would love to attend that rules clinic. Can you PM me and let me know when and were and what I need to do? I am not above learning.....lol

 

[default]

We had this example at an NSA tournament a few weeks ago.

Passed ball by the catcher to a semi-deep back stop. Runner heads home while catcher is retrieving the ball. The pitcher heads in to cover the plate, but because of the angle of the passed ball, she actually doesn't go straight to home. She is about 4 feet up the third bade line partially in fair territory. The runner, trying to avoid the pitcher (both for contact and just in case the catcher was relaying the ball to her), steps inside the baseline and does a slide by to home plate. The catcher never threw the ball to the pitcher, but tried to run and tag the base runner. Had the runner avoided the catcher on the foul side, she would have probably been tagged out. Umpire calls dead ball, and calls the runner out for being out of the baseline ( which in my opinion she wasn't, but the only opinion that mattered was the umpires. ).

In that instance, what should the runner have done? To me, she is being punished for doing the right thing.

 

[default]

We had this example at an NSA tournament a few weeks ago.

Passed ball by the catcher to a semi-deep back stop. Runner heads home while catcher is retrieving the ball. The pitcher heads in to cover the plate, but because of the angle of the passed ball, she actually doesn't go straight to home. She is about 4 feet up the third bade line partially in fair territory. The runner, trying to avoid the pitcher (both for contact and just in case the catcher was relaying the ball to her), steps inside the baseline and does a slide by to home plate. The catcher never threw the ball to the pitcher, but tried to run and tag the base runner. Had the runner avoided the catcher on the foul side, she would have probably been tagged out. Umpire calls dead ball, and calls the runner out for being out of the baseline ( which in my opinion she wasn't, but the only opinion that mattered was the umpires. ).

In that instance, what should the runner have done? To me, she is being punished for doing the right thing.

Sounds like obstruction to me, just didn't get the call. May have helped if the coach would have asked if blue saw obstruction by the pitcher and pointed out that was why the runner went where she did to avoid contact. May not have.

 

[default]

My favorite obstruction story is umpire obstruction. Had R1 on second, fast kid up to bat scorches one to the fence, throw to home to get R1 is off and goes to fence, blue is standing inside 1B foul line watching the plate, sees R1 touch the plate and starts to brush it off immediately after, forgot there was another live runner who is now rounding third headed for home, runner can't get to base because umpire is in the way, catcher can't tag runner because umpire is in the way, players complete almost a half circle around the umpire before the runner finds an angle to stick a foot on the plate. Umpire called her safe and apologized for getting in the way.

 

[default]

The team I coach has been screwed twice on the same play, which is as follows:

Ground ball towards the SS. SS moves in to field the ball.... gets trucked by the runner from 2nd heading to 3rd.

Automatic out, right?

Nope.

Actually, on one of the two plays the field ump made the call and was over turned by the home plate ump who claimed the ball "should have been fielded by the 2B not the SS" (it was hit up the middle). Both instances resulted in a run, ultimately.

 

[default]

Ground ball towards the SS. SS moves in to field the ball.... gets trucked by the runner from 2nd heading to 3rd.

As described, this is a textbook example of interference. Did the umpire explain why this one was not rule interference?

Actually, on one of the two plays the field ump made the call and was over turned by the home plate ump who claimed the ball "should have been fielded by the 2B not the SS" (it was hit up the middle). Both instances resulted in a run, ultimately.

1) One umpire can never overturn another's call. This is in the rule book. So something wasn't quite right with these guys...

2) When two fielders both go for a batted ball, only one of them can be considered as "the fielder making the play" and only that one fielder is protected from being interfered with.

Which one fielder is "making the play" is up to the umpire's judgment. If the ball was truly hit "up the middle", depending on what the umpire saw he could judge that either F4 or F6 had the play...or, even judge that neither of them had a play!

So the call you got is, at least, within the realm of possibility and could be supported by rule. But it's impossible for me to say if was absolutely wrong or right without seeing it. The "judgment" part is the unknown variable. This umpire apparently judged that F4 had the play. If that was the case, then F6 was guilty of obstruction.

 

[default]

As described, this is a textbook example of interference. Did the umpire explain why this one was not rule interference?

No, other than what I said about the two umpire crew's discussion with us about whether or not the SS could have made the play or if it was 2Bs ball. Which reminds me - their remedy was to put the runner back on 2B and play continued with the next batter.

The single ump who didn't make the call did not really have a satisfactory explanation, but I didn't really hold his hand to the fire either (I'm not adverse to making my point with an ump, but I also don't stand there and argue and argue and argue even if I'm 100% right. It's not getting reversed anyway. Let's just deal with the call and play ball.). I did show him the ASA rules in the middle of the inning and we had a nice discussion about how tough it is to see the whole field from behind the plate... which... it is.

1) One umpire can never overturn another's call. This is in the rule book. So something wasn't quite right with these guys...

2) When two fielders both go for a batted ball, only one of them can be considered as "the fielder making the play" and only that one fielder is protected from being interfered with.

Which one fielder is "making the play" is up to the umpire's judgment. If the ball was truly hit "up the middle", depending on what the umpire saw he could judge that either F4 or F6 had the play...or, even judge that neither of them had a play!

So the call you got is, at least, within the realm of possibility and could be supported by rule. But it's impossible for me to say if was absolutely wrong or right without seeing it. The "judgment" part is the unknown variable. This umpire apparently judged that F4 had the play. If that was the case, then F6 was guilty of obstruction.

Sounds to me like they sorta "lucked" into the right call then - I say this because one of my coaches had said "you can't assume the SS wasn't going to make the play" and later was told by the ump who overturned the call "You're right, we should not have assumed your SS didn't have a play on the ball" As to the overturning, I can say specifically that happened. I asked the home plate ump directly "So, you're overturning him" and he responded, "Yes. I am overturning him"

Meh... Like I said, cost us a run. In neither case did it cost us the game.

 

[default]

I did show him the ASA rules in the middle of the inning and we had a nice discussion about how tough it is to see the whole field from behind the plate... which... it is.

Okay...you're the plate umpire working solo. A batted ball is hit to short. No matter how big the field is, there's only one thing for you to be looking at- the ball being fielded! That is your priority and there really isn't anything else you need to see at that point.

But...yeah...that's a big field out there!

 

[default]

There is still tournaments where only 1 umpire is umpiring pool play games

Wow.... that's being TD cheap. ;&

I thought that stuff went out long time ago.

 

[default]

My favorite obstruction story is umpire obstruction. Had R1 on second, fast kid up to bat scorches one to the fence, throw to home to get R1 is off and goes to fence, blue is standing inside 1B foul line watching the plate, sees R1 touch the plate and starts to brush it off immediately after, forgot there was another live runner who is now rounding third headed for home, runner can't get to base because umpire is in the way, catcher can't tag runner because umpire is in the way, players complete almost a half circle around the umpire before the runner finds an angle to stick a foot on the plate. Umpire called her safe and apologized for getting in the way.

That is absolutely embarrassing for the umpire. One of my biggest pet peeves is for the umpire to call time to brush off the plate before the pitcher is back in circle with the ball and the base runners are settled. I can't tell you how many times when there is a play at the plate and I've had base runners round the bag at three and is looking for possible opportunity to advance because a pitcher is walking back to circle not paying attention or the catcher has their back turned shaking dirt off of their gear.

Then up goes blue's hands yelling "time". Am I wrong with thinking that this incorrect?

 

[default]

No, if the fielder doesn't have the ball and that causes the runner to have to go around her, the obstructed runner isn't "out of luck". She is awarded the base!

Contact is NOT a requirement of either interference or obstruction.

I'm not doubting that an umpire has told you this before. What I'm saying is what he told you was wrong.

This is what I thought the rule was....Asked Blue the other day between innings to watch the other teams shortstop because she is getting in the way of my runners stealing third and slowing them down, causing them to go around her and he specifically said he couldnt do anything unless there was contact... Is this rule the same for every sanctioning body?

 

[default]

well spoken Bretman!!! You are a true disciple of the game. I am supremely annoyed by coaches who train their players to stand on the corner of bags when they don't have a play.

 

[default]

This is what I thought the rule was....Asked Blue the other day between innings to watch the other teams shortstop because she is getting in the way of my runners stealing third and slowing them down, causing them to go around her and he specifically said he couldnt do anything unless there was contact... Is this rule the same for every sanctioning body?

To put it politely....baloney! Contact is not a requirement for either obstruction or interference. I've never come across any rule set that says it is either.