Steve Renshaw Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Runner attempting to steal third. Catchers throw towards second base side. Third baseman comes up line and catches the ball and tags a sliding runner knocking the ball lose. Runner slide is short of the base so fielder is trying to pick up the ball and tag runner. Umpire calls defensive obstruction on the third baseman. She was not holding her down, pulling on her or anything. Just trying to get the ball. Umpire said that if she held into the ball he would have called her out but since she dropped the ball and the runner had not reached the base it was obstruction. Can someone explain this stupidity for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaklandIsBack Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 mod deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 But to try and answer the question, my take is that because the runner's progression to the base was impeded by the player making the attempt to get the out and subsequently dropping the ball. Because the runner didn't have a clear path to the base, obstruction was called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJWalker45 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 What the rule was originally intended to be called, it's to keep infielders from deliberately blocking the path when they aren't involved in the play, such as first base standing on top of the bag so the runner has to take a wide path to second base. It has been called in that situation described however because the base runner may have been forced, per the umpire's decision, to step outside the base path by the infielder prior to applying the tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
officeglenn Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 But if the third baseman was blocking the path to the base, why would the umpire say he would have called her out if the third baseman hung on to the ball? Isn't she blocking the path either way? EDIT: Per West University Softball Association's "What is Obstruction?" article: Quote When a fielder does not have the ball and is not in the act of fielding a batted ball, an obstruction occurs if that fielder impedes the progress of a base runner. So after the ball was knocked loose, that would have constituted the fielder not having the ball and not being in the act of fielding the batted ball, I guess? Which at that point constitutes obstruction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashcarson15 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Was the obstruction called for the botched tag or for her getting in the way of the baserunner after she dropped the tag? The first would seem non-sensical, the latter would seem correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smzimbabwe Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 10 hours ago, OaklandIsBack said: Biggest issue I see is your watching softball Where did he say it was softball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Renshaw Posted March 19, 2018 Author Share Posted March 19, 2018 3 hours ago, crashcarson15 said: Was the obstruction called for the botched tag or for her getting in the way of the baserunner after she dropped the tag? The first would seem non-sensical, the latter would seem correct. Botched tag. She did not get in her way per se after the ball came out of the glove. It was one continuous play. The runner slid into her as she was making the tag. But just did not slide far enough to get to the bag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaklandIsBack Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 mod deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapshot Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Umpire here. Obstruction does not need to be intentional. Your description seems to be missing some information to make a definitive decision. After the fielder dropped the ball, did she in any way contact the runner? A fielder in the act of catching a thrown ball or fielding a batted ball generally takes precedence over the baserunner. While this is happening, it's the runner's directive to avoid contacting the fielder, or in any way hindering that play. If the ball gets past the fielder, or is dropped, then the fielder is no longer in the act of making a play, and it's the umpire's judgment if obstruction has now occurred. Back-to-Back Fatal Forty Champion 2015 & 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 On 3/18/2018 at 9:56 PM, Steve Renshaw said: Runner attempting to steal third. Catchers throw towards second base side. Third baseman comes up line and catches the ball and tags a sliding runner knocking the ball lose. Runner slide is short of the base so fielder is trying to pick up the ball and tag runner. Umpire calls defensive obstruction on the third baseman. She was not holding her down, pulling on her or anything. Just trying to get the ball. Umpire said that if she held into the ball he would have called her out but since she dropped the ball and the runner had not reached the base it was obstruction. Can someone explain this stupidity for me? If the defensive player does not have the ball in hand or glove, the base runner must have a clear path to the base. https://www.ncaa.com/news/softball/article/2017-06-29/softball-panel-recommends-obstruction-rule-change I'm assuming you watched a NCAA game over the weekend. For this season, NCAA rules were updated to mirror ASA and NFHS which previously removed "in the act of catching" from their rulebooks years prior to the 2017 NCAA softball rules committee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.