Interference question?

[default]

Ok, this happened recently to my team... Our batter hits a long ball over left fileder, she is coming to third and I am sending her home. The third basemen is standing in front of third. My runner almost stops and runs into the 3rd basemen. It was obvious and I look a the home plate umpire as everyone starts getting excited over the interference. The umpire saw it and immediatley puts his arm and with a fist,then looks at me and nods his head which I assume was the interference caLL? My runner stops a few feet after 3rd as their ss gets the ball at the back of the infield.. No throw was made home.

The umpire warns the 3rd basemen about blocking the runner and returns home. He does not award my runner home. When I ask him why she was not awarded home he says she was not going to go home. I told him it was clear that I was sending her. He said that she would have been out then. There was never even a throw made. I will give him that a perfect throw would have probably had her at the plate, but my question is, is that a judgement that is used to determine an awarded base? Wether or not the umpire thinks they would be out if they continued even if there is not a play??

 

[default]

By the sound of what you say the third baseman obstructed your runner, but I believe because she did not attempt to actually get to home she would not get it. By stopping at third she gave up the right to get it awarded. if she made the attempt to actually get there after the obstruction signal she may have had it awarded if she indeed had been out on an actual throw.

But it sounds like she gave herself up at third and stayed put.

Interference is when it's on a fielder getting interferred in making a play on a ball in which they have first right to do so and the runner would need to avoid her.


We had an obstruction once at first where our runner got hurt, the umps both had obstruction showing all the time the coaches were looking at her as it looked that bad. She did not try to gain second after they looked at her to make sure her brain wasn't scrambled and once she stayed at first they put their arms down and played ball. By that time the game was out of reach and there was no need to attempt to gain the second base advantage after the injury...

 

[default]

yes, obstruction, my brain is slow today.. To have a little clarifiaction, I stopped the runner after she went past and it was now clear she would probably get out at home because of the obstruction.. I was not going to send her to an out and hope the umpire makes the call, which he clearly did not.. And I beleive a base can be awarded without going all the way to the next base. You do not have to give yourself up to get an obstruction call. I know it is a judgment call, I was just curious if what the criteria is for this call? Do you have to think the girl would be safe at the next base or does it just have to be the player obstructed her ability to get there?? The latter is what I have gone by, or I guess an umpire could just call a girl afe or out befoe she bats based on what he thinks would happen???

OK OK, I know that is going a little far, but the umpire told me he would not award her the base because she would have been out if she went even without the obstruction, but he clearly acknowledged that she was obstructed?? I just did not think you should use your opinion on wether you think a runner would be safe or out to determine obstruction. I was curious if that is a normal factor in determing awarded bases?

 

[default]

I thought, with obstruction, the rule is you only get the base you would have gotten safely without the obstruction - so, yes, there is some judgment there. In this case, third was the correct award as that's as far as she could have made safe, even without the obstruction - you don't get an "extra" base.

 

[default]

My understanding is that to be awarded the next base you MUST attempt to go for it, although I have also been told by an umpire that he has the discretion to award the base in an extreme scenario.

However, it is not an automatic award though, if she goes. Let's say that the fist and arm go down in the Obstruction mode. If ball arrives for an apparent "out" call, the umpire then judges whether the obstructive behavior made the difference between "out" & "safe" ... although I think it is usually judged fairly liberally. In other words though, if Obstruction is called, and you send the runner just because of that but she had ZERO chance of getting there otherwise, the Obstruction will not be a "free pass" to the next base, she could still be called out.

The Obstruction call is designed to fix an unfair advantage gained by the Defense, but is not an automatic pass to the next base.

 

[default]

Always lots of confusion on the obstruction rules. Part of the reason is because they are kind of complicated! All of the "ins and outs" of the rule take up an entire page in the rule book.

Another confusing thing is that different sanctioning bodies can have slightly different rules to cover this. Some have automatic minimum one base awards, others do not. Fastpitch can be different than slow pitch, and both can be different than baseball, and each sanctioning body can be different than another within each of the similar- but different- sports.

I think that these differences cause the obstruction rules, for most casual fans and observers, to become a mish-mash of bits and pieces from one rule set, mixed together with bits and pieces from the another, then that gets sloshed around with what they see on TV during Major League Baseball games.

It's a nasty concoction!

In short, there isn't any "one-size-fits-all" answer on how obstruction is called or penalized. You really need to know which set of rules your game is being played under to come up with a definite answer.

 

[default]

I am something similar with my DD. She was playing SS with a runner on second. The ball was hit to her. She picked it up and then she was run into by the runner. She didn't even get a chance to "attempt" a throw. They called no obstruction because my DD didn't make the "attempt" to throw the ball. I don't know how she could have. You're right, it's complicated.

 

[default]

On that play (ball hit to F6), what you describe should be called as interference (dead ball, runner out), if not always, then 99% of the time.

One point worth repeating: Obstruction is a violation committed by the defense, interference is a violation committed by the offense. They are two different things covered by separate rules, each with separate penalties.

 

[default]

Bretman, what is the ASA rule on base award for obstruction, as in the initial post scenario?

 

[default]

The ASA rules (and I'm condensing a full page from the rule book and doing it from memory...):

- The umpire awards whichever base- or multiple bases- that the umpire judges the runner would have received had she not been obstructed.

So, there really isn't any requirement that the runner must try for the next base to be awarded it. If the umpire feels that she would have made it there, he can award that base at the end of the play.

- An obstructed runner cannot be put out by the defense at either of the two bases she was between when obstructed.

If a runner is obstructed between first and second, she cannot be put out at either first or second base. If she is, the out is nullified and the runner is placed at second, if the umpire judges she would have made it there, or on first if it's judged she would not have safely reached second base.

- If the umpire judges the runner would have advanced multiple bases without obstruction, then the runner cannot be put out anywhere between her last base and that advanced forward base.

A runner obstructed between first and second could be protected all the way to third, at the umpire's discretion. She then could not be put out anywhere between first and third.

That's about as basically as I can explain it, and it's still kind of complicated! As for the original play posted here, this is what I would have under ASA rules:

- Any base award at the end of the play is purely at the judgment and discretion of the umpire. If he feels the runner would have scored, award home. That she stopped just past third after being obstructed is irrelevant. She isn't required to try for that next base to have it awarded to her.

- If the umpire judges that the runner would not have scored without the obstruction, then there is no automatic forward base award. The runner safely reached third and that is all she is going to get.

Bottom line for obstruction base awards in ASA- the runner gets whatever base she would have reached had she not been obstructed.

 

[default]

Thanks - that's pretty much what I thought (and, thankfully, the way I've seen it ruled on the field).

 

[default]

But, also, if the runner would have went on to home plate and was thrown out... the umpire can call obstruction and award her home plate based on his thought of her being obstructed. When he stuck out the arm, which is the proper signal, then she has a free ride to home in other associations.

 

[default]

Thanks for the replies, it just appears that the umpire and I had differing opinions on how much my runner was obstructed!! This was ASA so I may have been thinking about another sanction where once the signal is given, they are awarded the next base!! Thanks again

 

[default]

Just a different twist from the NFHS Rules: RUNNERS ENTITLED TO ADVANCE: NFHS Rules 8-4 Art.3b a fielder not in possession of the ball or not making an initial play on a batted ball, impedes the progress of a runner or batter-runner who is legally running the bases, Obstructed runners are still required to touch all bases in proper order. At least in OHSAA fielders are not allowed to block the base or base path without having possession of the ball.

 

[default]

I just saw this thread. I too have had umpires (bad ones, all) try to tell me they won't award a base to a girl who doesn't attempt to reach the base after an obstruction. That is such incredibly bad umpiring that they shouldn't take their paycheck.

I have asked them, "Ok, then any time a girl on the other team is clearly going to be safe at home, I will have our third baseman and shortstop pick her up and hold her as she rounds third. She will not have tried for home, so are you going to keep her at third?"

Further, any decent umpire will always give the benefit of the doubt to the non-offending team. If there was any chance whatsoever Crush's runner would have been safe at home, she should have been awarded home! Otherwise, why not obstruct every single runner who is coming around third and is likely to be safe at home?

It's as simple as this: When there is obstruction, award the base(s) that could have been reasonably reached by the runner(s). If there is any doubt in the mind, give the benefit of that doubt to the obstructed runner. If the defensive team's coach complains, tell him to teach his girls to stop obstructing.

This is probably the #1 part of the game where I see bad umpiring. Most don't seem to be able to take in the entire play and process it well enough to figure out where the runner would likely reach. Often they aren't keeping an eye on the runner to see where she is in relation to the ball, so they have no idea where she could reach. It is mental laziness or just pure incompetence.