Obstruction - back to 3rd

[Bretman]

The aparent contradiction in Rule Supplement #36 has been widely discussed. So much so that the ASA "powers that be" addressed this in the "Plays and Clarifications" section of their website last year (February 2010).

Here is what they wrote:

There seems to be some question on the ASA obstruction rule as discussed in Rule Supplement 36. It states that “If a defensive player is blocking the base or base path without the ball, they are impeding the progress of the runner and this is obstruction.” This has been interpreted by some to say that regardless of the location of the runner or runners blocking a base is obstruction. Therefore, regardless of where the runner is, for example 20 feet from the base, in ASA this is obstruction. This is a misunderstanding of the Rule Supplement. The sentence is being taken out of context and should be applied with the rest of Rule Supplement 36.

However, it is also important to remember that a Rule Supplement is not a rule but written to support the rule. Our rule clearly states that it is obstruction if there is impeding of the runner. To have obstruction while blocking a base there must be two elements involved: 1) A defensive player blocking the base or base path without possession of the ball and 2) a defensive player impeding or hindering the runner’s advancing or returning to a base by the action of blocking the base.

(Link to clarification: http://www.asasoftball.com/umpires/clar ... bruary.asp )

[Makina]

If it is that close, dead ball award home plate on the OBS call. No way she goes back to 3rd.

[MTR]

If it is that close, dead ball award home plate on the OBS call. No way she goes back to 3rd.

You cannot possibly make such a judgment without seeing the entire play.

[Makina]

MTR - Of course I wasn't there to actually see it. I'm just giving my opinion based upon the original post description of the play and the photo!!! Where u actually there to see the play, so u can say it wasn't OBS.

[Bretman]

I don't think he's commenting on whether it's obstruction or not. He's commenting on whether the runner would have been out or not at home, minus the obstruction (which determines if the runner is given the plate or put back on third).

At least, thats what I think he's saying. If I'm wrong, I'm sure he'll let us know!

[MTR]

If it is that close, dead ball award home plate on the OBS call. No way she goes back to 3rd.

You cannot possibly make such a judgment without seeing the entire play.

Mike, can you honestly say that F2 in the photo is not blocking the plate without the ball?

She is, without a doubt, blocking the plate without the ball. But what does that have to do with anything, there is no rule forbidding that action.

Can you tell me the runner was impeded at this point? Looks like she is coming full bore, so at this point in the photo, can you say for certain she has been obstructed yet?

You are looking up the catcher's tail end, you cannot see what is happening on the other side of the play (which, BTW, 3BLE is a terrible umpire position for a play at home, but that's for an umpire's board). AFA we know, she could have already been OBS, we don't know which is why I stated Makina, or anyone else, cannot make a definitive judgment without having seen the entire play.

[Iluvblue]

You cannot possibly make such a judgment without seeing the entire play.



That is a BOOM, BOOM play at THE PLATE. I dont need to see anything else, there is no way in hell you can send that kid back to third base. No umpire worth a damn would send that kid back, and no coach worth a damn would even think about trying to argue with a blue that called obstruction and awarded the kid home.

Now, send the kid bck to third, and EVERY COACH that knows more than just a little bit about the game would be out of the dugout arguing that bullshit call all day.

Cmon, you even suggesting that kid goes back to third is exactly why coaches get so upset with some umpires.

Im not even arguing the obstruction (which it is), im just saying if the ump called obstruction, that kid scores. It is either that, or blue has an out.... not obstruction, now go back to third.

[MTR]

You cannot possibly make such a judgment without seeing the entire play.

That is a BOOM, BOOM play at THE PLATE. I dont need to see anything else, there is no way in hell you can send that kid back to third base. No umpire worth a damn would send that kid back, and no coach worth a damn would even think about trying to argue with a blue that called obstruction and awarded the kid home.

No umpire worth anything would make such a stupid comment without seeing the entire play. Just how do you know what happened prior to the play. How do you know the runner wasn't obstructed earlier in the play?

And again, from the angle, how do you know the catcher did not make a clean catch and swipe prior to any contact because, as stated earlier, you cannot tell if it is OBS from that picture. There is no evidence of OBS from that point of view.

Now, send the kid bck to third, and EVERY COACH that knows more than just a little bit about the game would be out of the dugout arguing that bullshit call all day.

Cmon, you even suggesting that kid goes back to third is exactly why coaches get so upset with some umpires.

Im not even arguing the obstruction (which it is), im just saying if the ump called obstruction, that kid scores. It is either that, or blue has an out.... not obstruction, now go back to third.

I'm not arguing anything other than unless you or anyone else saw the entire play, you/they are ignorant of all the facts to make such assumptions.

[Iluvblue]

And again, from the angle, how do you know the catcher did not make a clean catch and swipe prior to any contact because, as stated earlier, you cannot tell if it is OBS from that picture. There is no evidence of OBS from that point of view.




I just said that Im not really arguing the obstruction call or not, but as the OP stated, obstruction WAS CALLED on this play. Based upon that, what I am saying is there is no way in hell you can send her back to third because as this pic clearly states, this player is a fraction of a second from reaching the plate. So if she was obstructed at all (which blue in this play said she was) then the ONLY possible result of this play would be the runner scores.

And if you do send her back, all you did was tell every coach out there they should have the 3rd baseman or whoever, obstruct runners any time they can, cause it is a no lose situation.

[MTR]

And again, from the angle, how do you know the catcher did not make a clean catch and swipe prior to any contact because, as stated earlier, you cannot tell if it is OBS from that picture. There is no evidence of OBS from that point of view.




I just said that Im not really arguing the obstruction call or not, but as the OP stated, obstruction WAS CALLED on this play. Based upon that, what I am saying is there is no way in hell you can send her back to third because as this pic clearly states, this player is a fraction of a second from reaching the plate. So if she was obstructed at all (which blue in this play said she was) then the ONLY possible result of this play would be the runner scores.

And if you do send her back, all you did was tell every coach out there they should have the 3rd baseman or whoever, obstruct runners any time they can, cause it is a no lose situation.

And where was the runner when she slowed? Doesn't say, does it? Sounds like it was long before any play at home. And maybe at that point, the umpire judged that the runner would not had made home safely. You don't know. Again, you have to see the whole play.