Question for Brentman- Obstruction

[wow]

Can you clarify the obstruction call?

Here is the question- ball is hit into the base path runner and ss collide. The ump puts out his hand and says nothing. Runner scores from second. No play anywhere in t he field. Is this a question the coach has to ask for help on? Or is it called by the field ump.

Who has a right to what? Fielder to ball or runner to base path?

Seems like every time this is called both teams feel like their player has been obstructed?

Also when is there a "no call" even when the field ump signals one?

I am sure there are 100's of scenarios here but any general interpretations would be insightful..

 

[Comp]

The defensive player always has the right to make the initial play on a batted ball. If 2 defenders are moving to the ball only 1 of them is protected from obstruction and the umpire must judge which one has the best chance of making the play. The offense has to give way to the defender making this initial play on a batted ball. From your description, It sounds as if the base umpire ruled obstruction which is the left arm out delayed dead ball signal. But, if the ball was hit to the ss and the runner collided with her while fielding the ball it sounds like it should have been interference.

 

[BretMan2]

Where was the ball when the two players made contact? Was the shortstop moving to field it? Did another player have a chance to field it?

Remember...obstruction is a rule violation committed by the defense. Interference is a rule violation committed by the offense.

This umpire gave the signal you would give for obstruction. The penalty for obstruction is to award the runner whichever base she would have reached without the obstruction. If she would have scored anyway, then there wouldn't be any additional penalty.

If the fielder was fielding the ball and was interfered with, the ball would be immediately dead and the runner would be out. It seems like the defensive coach would have been asking for an explanation if his fielder was interfered with, but the run was still allowed to score.

 

[JoeA1010]

The play with a runner on second and a ground ball to the shortstop's left is one that is fraught with the potential for an argument. I have been tossed twice in college games and one was on this play. The question is whether the shortstop had a reasonable chance to make a play. If so, then you probably have interference on the runner. If not, then it's probably obstruction on the shortstop. The tough thing for the shortstop and the runner is that both are following the ball. The shortstop likely has her eye on the ball the entire way, while the runner is probably following the ball until it passes her and then is ready to pick up the third base coach. It all happens so fast that there is no time for the two to find each other, so they collide or come close to it.

 

[wow]

Thanks.. Clear as mud.. I forgot to differentiate between obstruction and interference. This situation was interference (at least that was my thought ,and I was wrong) and the ball did not make it past the first defensive person. Consequently there was no play made. What I was unsure about was why the ump signaled the obstruction but when appeal said there was no call, but the runner made it all the way home. Makes sense from the above posts. Sorry for being vague and not having used the correct nomenclature.

So the question becomes who has the right to what? from my view and perspective the runner interfered with the person making the attempt on the ball.

There was a very similar call in the ASU/LSU game Sunday. Runners could not advance and the runner hit with the ball was out. Just seems like there is a fine line between obstruction and interference and depending on what your interpretation is you could see the same play and make either call.

 

[snoman76]

In case any of you were wondering...

no?men?cla?ture

noun
the devising or choosing of names for things, especially in a science or other discipline.
the body or system of names in a particular field.
plural noun: nomenclatures
"the nomenclature of chemical compounds"
formal
the term or terms applied to someone or something.
"“customers” was preferred to the original nomenclature “passengers.”"

 

[SoCal_Dad]

Thanks.. Clear as mud.. I forgot to differentiate between obstruction and interference. This situation was interference (at least that was my thought ,and I was wrong) and the ball did not make it past the first defensive person. Consequently there was no play made. What I was unsure about was why the ump signaled the obstruction but when appeal said there was no call, but the runner made it all the way home. Makes sense from the above posts. Sorry for being vague and not having used the correct nomenclature.

So the question becomes who has the right to what? from my view and perspective the runner interfered with the person making the attempt on the ball.

There was a very similar call in the ASU/LSU game Sunday. Runners could not advance and the runner hit with the ball was out. Just seems like there is a fine line between obstruction and interference and depending on what your interpretation is you could see the same play and make either call.

You need to provide more info on the play to get a more definitive answer on whether the OBS call was correct or it should have been INT.

In addition to the questions in the previous posts, did the SS have a realistic chance at fielding the ball? A fielder is not protected while attempting to get to one out of their reach. Umpires have to judge whether the fielder had an opportunity to actually field the ball to call INT. If not, the fielder commits OBS if they impede a runner.

A runner being hit by a batted ball like in the ASU/LSU is covered by a different rule and that one has the provision about passing an infielder other than the pitcher.

 

[wow]

In case any of you were wondering...

no?men?cla?ture

noun
the devising or choosing of names for things, especially in a science or other discipline.
the body or system of names in a particular field.
plural noun: nomenclatures
"the nomenclature of chemical compounds"
formal
the term or terms applied to someone or something.
"“customers” was preferred to the original nomenclature “passengers.”"

outstanding.. I was wondering what that even meant..

 

[snoman76]

RIGHT! I still cant pronounce it.
I'm pretty sure I didn't even read the rest of the post either.. I stopped at that word and had to look it up. LOL

 

[EDGE MARCHINY]

We had one two weeks ago runner on 2nd ball hit up the middle behind the runner . The ss and runner hit each other ump calls out the runner. No way the ss was getting the ball. Was that the right call

 

[BretMan2]

We had one two weeks ago runner on 2nd ball hit up the middle behind the runner . The ss and runner hit each other ump calls out the runner. No way the ss was getting the ball. Was that the right call

It all depends on if the umpire judged that the fielder had some reasonable chance of actually fielding the ball.

Let's take this play to an extreme. Suppose the ball was rolling up the first base foul line when the runner and shortstop collided. You would have to say that the shortstop had zero chance of getting that one, so this would be obstruction.

Now imagine the ball rolling right at the shortstop. It would be reasonable to assume that the shortstop would field that one. Now you have interference against the runner.

In between those two extremes you have an infinite number of paths the ball might take. Somewhere in that range of possibilities, there's some point where you might expect the shortstop to get the ball, and some point where you figure it's out of her range. It's up to the umpire to judge just where exactly those points are.

 

[First Pitch]

Another obstruction question: Runner on first, ball hit into right center field..R1 rounds second going to 3rd. CF throws ball to 3rd baseman, its a high throw and 3rd baseman is standing on the base reaching up for ball..runner slides into 3rd. Home plate umpire calls obstruction as my 3rd baseman is catching the ball. Runner was safe regardless but why would the ump call obstruction? The base was not blocked, and my player was making a play on the ball. ASA rules if that makes a difference.

 

[BretMan2]

Another obstruction question: Runner on first, ball hit into right center field..R1 rounds second going to 3rd. CF throws ball to 3rd baseman, its a high throw and 3rd baseman is standing on the base reaching up for ball..runner slides into 3rd. Home plate umpire calls obstruction as my 3rd baseman is catching the ball. Runner was safe regardless but why would the ump call obstruction? The base was not blocked, and my player was making a play on the ball. ASA rules if that makes a difference.

I could only guess why some other person made a judgment call the way they did. But I can comment on some particulars of the obstruction rule itself.

- Base was not blocked: A fielder standing ON the base could prevent a runner from rounding the base. It might also force a runner to slide when they wouldn't have otherwise, or force them to slow down if they're coming in standing up. Any of those could be judged as obstructing the runner.

- Fielder was making a play on the ball: Since this was a thrown ball, not a batted ball, it doesn't matter. The fielder does not have the right of way when fielding a thrown ball. Up until the point where the fielder actually has possession of the ball, the runner has the right of way and the fielder can be called for obstruction.

 

[First Pitch]

I could only guess why some other person made a judgment call the way they did. But I can comment on some particulars of the obstruction rule itself.

- Base was not blocked: A fielder standing ON the base could prevent a runner from rounding the base. It might also force a runner to slide when they wouldn't have otherwise, or force them to slow down if they're coming in standing up. Any of those could be judged as obstructing the runner.

- Fielder was making a play on the ball: Since this was a thrown ball, not a batted ball, it doesn't matter. The fielder does not have the right of way when fielding a thrown ball. Up until the point where the fielder actually has possession of the ball, the runner has the right of way and the fielder can be called for obstruction.

Thanks BretMan2..appreciate the info