Runner interference or obstruction or no call at all?

[default]

Runner interference or obstruction or no call at all?


Ok no dog in this fight was just watching a game and this happened:


Runner on second,
Hard hit ground ball just about 3" to the third base side of second base.
Runner on second is advancing to third on the hit,
The Short Stop "who is playing in the base path" turns to try to make a play on the ball
And makes contact with the advancing runner.
The runner makes third and home on the play. (The ball goes past the center fielder to the fence, like I say it was a very hard hit)


Now the coach of the defensive team wanted runner interference on the play.
No call was made.
So a great debate started in the stands
Some said the runner should have been called out for interfering with the short stop
Some said the correct call was obstruction by the short stop because she was in the base path with no chance at making a play on the ball. (Runner scored any way)
The most important opinion was the Blue's they elected no call at all.






Also this was not part of this play but part of the conversation by the arm chair Blue's:
is there a signal that an umpire will give if there is an obstruction on the play,
"right arm straight out with hand clinched in fist"
And is it up to the head coach to call for the obstruction call after they see the arm signal from the blue?

and while I have your interest is there a limit to how many times a coach can have a conference with the same pitcher during a game?

 

[default]

Runner interference or obstruction or no call at all?


Ok no dog in this fight was just watching a game and this happened:


Runner on second,
Hard hit ground ball just about 3" to the third base side of second base.
Runner on second is advancing to third on the hit,
The Short Stop "who is playing in the base path" turns to try to make a play on the ball
And makes contact with the advancing runner.
The runner makes third and home on the play. (The ball goes past the center fielder to the fence, like I say it was a very hard hit)


Now the coach of the defensive team wanted runner interference on the play.
No call was made.
So a great debate started in the stands
Some said the runner should have been called out for interfering with the short stop
Some said the correct call was obstruction by the short stop because she was in the base path with no chance at making a play on the ball. (Runner scored any way)
The most important opinion was the Blue's they elected no call at all.






Also this was not part of this play but part of the conversation by the arm chair Blue's:
is there a signal that an umpire will give if there is an obstruction on the play,
"right arm straight out with hand clinched in fist"
And is it up to the head coach to call for the obstruction call after they see the arm signal from the blue?

and while I have your interest is there a limit to how many times a coach can have a conference with the same pitcher during a game?

This is interesting... Because I've been involved as an umpire with this one and would love to hear Bretman's call on this. You will see how I would have called it and did. I say no call is good but the rule book may say otherwise. If it was unplayable I would say the one call that could be made would be is obstruction, not runner interference.

The pitcher question....not in a game no but per inning yes but that number per inning varies depending sanctioning body.

 

[default]

If there was no chance in the world of the fielder even getting to this ball- let alone fielding it- then it's NOT interference by the runner. She didn't interfere with a chance to make a play, because there was no chance of a play being made.

Fielders do have the right of way when it comes to fielding a batted ball. While you tend to give every benefit of the doubt to the fielder, if the ball is so far away from her that she couldn't possible field it then she's not "in the act of fielding the ball".

If it's not interference, then it's obstruction. When the umpire calls obstruction, he should hold out the left arm with a fist and verbally call, "Obstruction". The left arm signal itself isn't just for obstruction calls. It's the signal for a delayed dead ball, meaning that there has been a rule violation, but the play continues and any penalties are accessed at the end of the play. This is the same signal you'll see when an illegal pitch is called, which is also a delayed dead ball situation.

On obstruction, at the end of the play the umpire will call time and award the runner whichever bases he judges would have been reached, minus the obstruction.

On this play, it sounds like the runner scored without a play being made, and probably would have scored anyway. So the end result would be the same whether obstruction was called or not. But umpires should call obstruction anytime they see it even if there's no impact on the play.

 

[default]

It is possible the umpire called obstruction and people didn't notice that it was signaled. At the conclusion of play, there was nothing to enforce since the runner scored.

The rules on number of charged conferences allowed vary by rule sets - not all conferences are charged (e.g. substitution). For ASA and NFHS, a pitching change has to be made on the 4th charged conference regardless of whether it is the same pitcher. NSA is apparently like MLB, a pitching change has to be made on the 2nd conference in an inning with the same pitcher. NCAA is 2nd charged conference in an inning with the same pitcher - even if they didn't/don't meet with the pitcher.

 

[default]

I don't want to hijack but.....no, I do. I have another rule question. This happened to my team this weekend and I believe the wrong call was made.

My batter strikes out, catcher drops the 3rd strike.
the firstbaseman establishes the safety bag.
My batter/runner now starts to run toward the white bag I fair, so obviously she is no longer in the running lane.
The runner ad 1st baseman collide at the bag. It appeared from my angle that the throw initiated the contact.
Runner called out for not being in the running lane.

I ask home plate ump to clarify.

He states that my runner should stay in the running lane, initiate the contact and will hen be awarded the obstruction.
This cannot be correct can it. A rule that wants contact?

This was PGF by the way.

 

[default]

Okay Bret, we need you again. I hate to put my terrible rules record in jepardy but here it goes. Even tho the umpire's reasoning may be a little off I believe he is correct in making the call. Common sense would tell us that any sanction that recognizes the safety bag would indeed have something different to explain the involvement of the batter/runner to avoid a collision without being punished. The problem is I don't recall ever reading anything different. Runners are instructed to get to their running lane which becomes a haven of sorts if there's any controversy. This is an unfortunate scenario where the ump had no choice although if the runner attempted to avoid the final contact I would hope a base umpire would take this into consideration. Okay Bret, set us straight and to be quite honest I hope you do on this one.

 

[default]

I don't want to hijack but.....no, I do. I have another rule question. This happened to my team this weekend and I believe the wrong call was made.

My batter strikes out, catcher drops the 3rd strike.
the firstbaseman establishes the safety bag.
My batter/runner now starts to run toward the white bag I fair, so obviously she is no longer in the running lane.
The runner ad 1st baseman collide at the bag. It appeared from my angle that the throw initiated the contact.
Runner called out for not being in the running lane.

I ask home plate ump to clarify.

He states that my runner should stay in the running lane, initiate the contact and will hen be awarded the obstruction.
This cannot be correct can it. A rule that wants contact?

This was PGF by the way.

Good one, I'd like clarification on this one as well. We were the defensive team in this situation.

 

[default]

This sounds like a bad call.

When the fielder is using the colored base to take the throw, the runner is allowed to use the white base.

In this case, the three foot running lane is essentially "mirrored" across the foul line. Instead of being three feet wide and entirely in foul territory, it is six feet wide, three feet on both sides of the foul line.

As long as the runner is within this "expanded" running lane, she should not be considered as being out of the lane.

That's the rule...now some personal commentary. Any umpire that tells a coach his runner "needs to initiate contact" in order to have an obstruction call is an idiot. Not only does this promote unsafe play, contact is NOT a requirement of obstruction.

 

[default]

...the firstbaseman establishes the safety bag...

It has always been my understanding that the safety bag could be used by the defense if play "took the defender there". The description by 25s_dad sounds as though the 1st baseman chose to use the safety bag as opposed to being forced there by the play. Is there a penalty for doing that?

 

[default]

It has always been my understanding that the safety bag could be used by the defense if play "took the defender there". The description by 25s_dad sounds as though the 1st baseman chose to use the safety bag as opposed to being forced there by the play. Is there a penalty for doing that?

There are several instances when the defense may legally use the colored base on the initial play at first base.

- When an errant throw pulls them off the white base to the colored one.

- When the fielder must complete the play from foul ground. For example, on a fair batted ball that hit the base, or had rebounded off a fielder, such that the ball is eventually picked up in foul ground.

- On an uncaught third strike, when the catcher is making the throw from the foul side of the first base line.

In each case, the batter-runner may use the white base. Not must, but may. Since a batter-runner should normally be heading toward the colored base, they aren't expected to make a last second course change because of something the defense is doing. They have the option of using the white base, but it's not mandatory.

What if the defense uses the colored base when not entitled to? This can be interpreted as obstructing the runner, if the runner has to slow down or alter course. And, of course, if the defense is on the colored base when not entitled to be there...then there is no tag of first base. That is, it would be the same as if the fielder caught the ball but was off the bag.

 

[default]

- When an errant throw pulls them off the white base to the colored one.

I've heard ASA recently changed their interpretation of this. It used to be the fielder could only use the colored bag after the throw took them to foul ground. The umpire posters were griping that the new interpretation allows the fielder to switch bags to catch the throw.

Is this correct and how does it compare to other rule sets?

 

[default]

I've heard ASA recently changed their interpretation of this. It used to be the fielder could only use the colored bag after the throw took them to foul ground. The umpire posters were griping that the new interpretation allows the fielder to switch bags to catch the throw.

Is this correct and how does it compare to other rule sets?

Yes, they changed this interpretation about 3 years ago. While the actual rule in the rule book is still the same as it was, ASA issued a new interpretation of what constitutes "being pulled into foul ground". This interpretation was published on their website in the "Plays and Clarifications" section.

The old interpretation was that the fielder had to be pulled past the colored base and completely into foul ground. The newer interpretation is that the fieler could also be pulled directly from the white to the colored base. The example they gave was of a fielder set up on the white base who has to jump high for an errant throw, then lands on the colored base. This is now a legal tag of first base.

In my other post I was going to mention that the rules I quoted are ASA and NFHS rules. While other organizations might be similar, off the top of my head I'm not versed enough in the ins and outs of the double base rules for other sanctioning bodies, that I don't even call games for, to say 100% that all of these same rules would apply. It is possible that they have their own exceptions and interpretations that I'm not aware of.

 

[default]

I KNEW IT!!!!!!!

Adam Acord!!!!! I'm callin you out son. HAHA

just funning around. I thought I was right but I anted is clarification for his very reason.

On a side note, Adam and his SILVER team are a great group to play. I hope to give them a better game next time.

 

[default]

In my other post I was going to mention that the rules I quoted are ASA and NFHS rules. While other organizations might be similar, off the top of my head I'm not versed enough in the ins and outs of the double base rules for other sanctioning bodies, that I don't even call games for, to say 100% that all of these same rules would apply. It is possible that they have their own exceptions and interpretations that I'm not aware of.

Thanks bretman. I take it NFHS is the same as the current ASA interpretation.

 

[default]

Hey everybody here's an important point to remember...ASA allows the defensive player to set up in foul with a foot on the orange bag relinquishing the white bag to the batter runner. You must remember that NSA does NOT allow this. I personally wrote a "rule change request" letter that was discussed at last year's national convention which resulted in a rules clarification on this very thing. It did not accomplish what I wanted to accomplish (which was to mirror the ASA rule on this). What it did, though, was add clarity because the old rule in the NSA rule book was unclear, thus leaving room for interpretation by the umpires. We do not want people interpreting the rules... we want them to understand and enforce them.
So, to summarize... when playing ASA the fielder CAN set up in foul to complete the play if the throw is coming from foul territory. When playing NSA, doing that would result in an obstruction call and the runner will be called safe even if she is thrown out by 5 steps!!!! Believe that...it has been enforced and WILL be enforced this weekend at the Firefighter's Memorial Tournament, which is probably one of the larger NSA tourneys.

So, coaches, another disparity between the rules that you have to know, summarized and made easy to understand for you. Now, start thinking about booking some winter training time at Field of Drea....nope...not gonna do it. I can't, with good conscience, hijack a proper hijack.

CZ