What is the rule, obstruction?

[DW@SBC]

Baserunner 'A' is stealing second base.

One step away from second is hit by the shortstop who was legitimately leaping for a high throw but has no chance of touching it.

Shortstop lands on the base runner knocking her down before she touched the base and the ball goes into center field.

Runner gets up and runs to third base and is tagged out by two feet on the slide.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Very next play runner on first runs to second, the second baseman standing directly in the base bath never moves, runner has to go around and they hit shoulders slowing the runner down.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for your response.

 

[HeyBlue!]

First of all I have to say this opinion is based solely on the situation as you described it, having not seen it first hand. But as you describe it, I would suggest the first scenario was not obstruction if the contact occured as a result of the fielder making an attempt to catch a throw. Sometimes attempting to catch an errant throw draws a fielder into the path of a baserunner and the two simply collide. The result is what is known as a "train wreck". Neither party is at fault and neither party is penalized for obstruction or interference, respectively.

However, the second scenario sounds like a text book case of obstruction as you described it.

 

[wow]

This happens all the time.. It really depends on the ump. The litmose test is to see if there was a play on the ball and what effort was made toward the base. If there is no play and a girl is in the way the call is obstruction. If there is a play it's a tough call to make. The base runner and the person making the play have a right to the ball/base.

 

[DW@SBC]

First of all I have to say this opinion is based solely on the situation as you described it, having not seen it first hand. But as you describe it, I would suggest the first scenario was not obstruction if the contact occured as a result of the fielder making an attempt to catch a throw. Sometimes attempting to catch an errant throw draws a fielder into the path of a baserunner and the two simply collide. The result is what is known as a "train wreck". Neither party is at fault and neither party is penalized for obstruction or interference, respectively.

However, the second scenario sounds like a text book case of obstruction as you described it.

Neither were called obstruction. I tend to disagree as the second is clearly obstruction and the first one she would have easily been on third had she not been knocked to the ground by a person who had no chance to catch the ball.

But it is what it is.

 

[DW@SBC]

I guess I just wanted to know about these two plays because I was the first base coach and its tough to see your girls get knocked around by the other team and need to know whether it is normal to question the umpire in this situation?

He then proceeded to say that if in his judgement the runner could get the base and he believed it was obstruction he would call it. But in the first situation that is exactly what happened, had she not been knocked down she would have been safe and maybe not even a throw to third would have been made but instead she was out.

just curious, thanks for the responses.

 

[TnTs_Dad]

Agree with Hey Blue!, first doesn't sound like obstruction, just unfortunate incidental contact. The second does sound like obstruction.

I really hate scenario's like the first. Seen it many times and parents come unglued at the younger ages.

 

[HeyBlue!]

Unfortunately any time judgement comes into play, it is never simply a matter of black and white. And your viewpoint of "no chance to catch a ball" is based on judgement. Not saying your viewpoint is wrong, because again I didn't witness the play.

However, consider this: If a throw is wide of first base, a first baseman is taught to come off the bag to get the ball. She isn't coached to do this only if she has "a chance to catch the ball". She is coached to do this on every errant throw, making every effort to not let the ball get by her. Rules aren't written to allow fielders to only make attempts at catching thrown balls that are definitely "catchable", so judgement comes into play from the umpire as to whether or not it was a legtimate reaction and "attempt" at going after an errant throw, versus just making contact to impede the runner.

 

[HeyBlue!]

We had a play in a game a couple years ago where an errant throw from the cutoff drew the third baseman (F5) right into the path of a batter/runner going for a triple. F5 was pulled several feet off the bag and directly into the path of the hard charging batter/runner (B1). F5 caught the ball simultaneously as the two players collided, knocking them both to the ground and jarring the ball from the glove before a tag was made by F5. The two players ended up laying prone on the ground (not unconcious, but the closest thing to it) as the ball rolled about ten feet away and came to rest with everyone on the diamond standing frozen in disbelief at what they had just witnessed. Time was called and both coaches were summoned to the diamond to attend to their players laying on the ground.

 

[The3dm]

Both are obstruction, although the second one sounds inconsequential. Obstruction like interference does not have to be intentional. If the player in the first example had been sliding and the fielder landed on her after attempting to catch a thrown ball, then she got up and attempted to go to third I would say no. Since she was knocked off her feet by the fielder that most definitely it is obstruction and she should have been awarded third and not called out. As soon as this happened there should have been a delayed dead-ball signal indicated by the umpire responsible for that area.

You didn't say what happened in the second example, but if she reached second safely I would not have made the call.

 

[BretMan2]

The actual rules on obstruction and interference take up several pages of the rule book, so you're going to get the condensed version here.

If a fielder is fielding a batted ball the fielder has the right of way. The runner is obligated to yield any space needed by the fielder to field the ball. If the runner does not, then it is interference. Dead ball, runner out, other runners return to their last base.

This protection does NOT apply to a thrown ball (except in NCAA softball, and only then if the fielder is standing in position to receive the throw, not jumping after a bad throw). A fielder jumping into a runner's path to catch a thrown ball is obstruction.

If the fielder is not fielding a batted ball, or in possession of the ball, then the runner has the right of way. The fielder may not impede the runner from running the bases in any way. If they do, then it is obstruction.

Obstruction is a delayed dead ball. That means that the play continues on to its conclusion. At the end of the play, the umpire will award the obstructed runner any base(s) he judges she would have reached had she not been obstructed.

If the obstructed runner is put out before reaching her base, then the ball becomes dead and the award is made.

Plugging all that into the plays being discussed here...

The first sounds like obstruction should have been called. If the umpire judged that the runner would have made it to third, minus the obstruction, then she would be awarded third base.

The second also sounds like obstruction. Since the runner wasn't put out, the play would proceed to its natural conclusion. The runner would then be awarded any base the umpire judges she would have reached. You didn't say what happened next, so I can't guess which base that might have been.

 

[wvanalmsick]

The actual rules on obstruction and interference take up several pages of the rule book, so you're going to get the condensed version here.

If a fielder is fielding a batted ball the fielder has the right of way. The runner is obligated to yield any space needed by the fielder to field the ball. If the runner does not, then it is interference. Dead ball, runner out, other runners return to their last base.

This protection does NOT apply to a thrown ball (except in NCAA softball, and only then if the fielder is standing in position to receive the throw, not jumping after a bad throw). A fielder jumping into a runner's path to catch a thrown ball is obstruction.

If the fielder is not fielding a batted ball, or in possession of the ball, then the runner has the right of way. The fielder may not impede the runner from running the bases in any way. If they do, then it is obstruction.

Obstruction is a delayed dead ball. That means that the play continues on to its conclusion. At the end of the play, the umpire will award the obstructed runner any base(s) he judges she would have reached had she not been obstructed.

If the obstructed runner is put out before reaching her base, then the ball becomes dead and the award is made.

Plugging all that into the plays being discussed here...

The first sounds like obstruction should have been called. If the umpire judged that the runner would have made it to third, minus the obstruction, then she would be awarded third base.

The second also sounds like obstruction. Since the runner wasn't put out, the play would proceed to its natural conclusion. The runner would then be awarded any base the umpire judges she would have reached. You didn't say what happened next, so I can't guess which base that might have been.

Bretman, in scenario #1, the runner was knocked down prior to reaching second base, so she would have been awarded second base. But, after seeing the error, the runner then elects to gain another base, and is tagged out prior to reaching the next base.

My question is....The runner gained the base which she was trying to reach, second base. When the runner decided to try for another base, then she gave up the protection of the delayed dead ball, didn't she?

 

[BretMan2]

Bretman, in scenario #1, the runner was knocked down prior to reaching second base, so she would have been awarded second base. But, after seeing the error, the runner then elects to gain another base, and is tagged out prior to reaching the next base.

My question is....The runner gained the base which she was trying to reach, second base. When the runner decided to try for another base, then she gave up the protection of the delayed dead ball, didn't she?

Hard to say without seeing it. The rules say that she gets whatever base she would have got had she not been obstructed. That is entirely up to the judgment of the umpire. I don't have a clue what he saw or how he judged it.

If the runner advances beyond the "protected" base, she may be put out. But depending on the play, the umpire may have judged that she would have reached third has she not been knocked down. That seems like a reasonable assumption, since she was tagged out by two feet.

If that was the case,the runner would be awarded third base. If she went past third, then she's on her own and can be put out.

 

[JCellar17]

We had a situation last week where we were on defense. Line drive to shallow center, my 1B stands on the bag and runner runs into her. Umpire Yells obstruction and when the 1b coach hears this he sends his runner. We already have the ball at 2B. We tag runner 1/2 way between 1st and 2nd. Ump awards the runner 2B. When I spoke with the umpire I said there is no way she was going to make 2nd base if she wasn't obstructed, he said she automatically gets the base.

 

[BretMan2]

We had a situation last week where we were on defense. Line drive to shallow center, my 1B stands on the bag and runner runs into her. Umpire Yells obstruction and when the 1b coach hears this he sends his runner. We already have the ball at 2B. We tag runner 1/2 way between 1st and 2nd. Ump awards the runner 2B. When I spoke with the umpire I said there is no way she was going to make 2nd base if she wasn't obstructed, he said she automatically gets the base.

He was wrong.

More details of the obstruction rule...an obstructed runner may not be put out between the two bases where she was obstructed. In this case, she cannot be put out between first and second base.

If she is put out, the umpire needs to decide if she would have made the advanced base. If not, then the runner is placed back on the previous base. In this case, if the runner would not have made it to second, then she should have been placed back on first.

Obstruction is never an automatic/minimum one base award. Well, it is in baseball and it is in USSSA slow pitch softball. I assume that this game was neither one of those.

 

[HeyBlue!]

We had a situation last week where we were on defense. Line drive to shallow center, my 1B stands on the bag and runner runs into her. Umpire Yells obstruction and when the 1b coach hears this he sends his runner. We already have the ball at 2B. We tag runner 1/2 way between 1st and 2nd. Ump awards the runner 2B. When I spoke with the umpire I said there is no way she was going to make 2nd base if she wasn't obstructed, he said she automatically gets the base.

The umpire's statement is inaccurate...obstructed runners don't "automatically advance to the next base". They are awarded the base they would have reached IN THE UMPIRE'S JUDGEMENT had the obstruction not occurred. From what you have described it sounds like the runner should have just been returned to first base. (Note: Obstruction could also result in more than one base being awarded).