ASA obstruction wording

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Mar 14, 2011
785
18
Silicon Valley, CA
"If the obstructed runner is put out after passing the base which would have been reached had there not been obstruction or ran beyond the two bases the obstruction occurred, the obstructed runner will be called out. The ball remains live."

What does the "... or ran beyond" clause mean and why is it there?
 
Oct 11, 2010
8,337
113
Chicago, IL
Clear as mud.

If the runner gets tackled by the P between 1st and 2nd she does not have free reign of the field. She will get her base but if she trys to extend it she can be called out as normal.

(She can not try to run home then be returned to 2nd if she is out)
 
Last edited:
Mar 14, 2011
785
18
Silicon Valley, CA
Clear as mud.

If the runner gets tackled by the P between 1st and 2nd she does not have free reign of the field. She will get her base but if she trys to extend it she can be called out as normal.

(She can not try to run home then be returned to 2nd if she is out)

Say in your example the umpire judges the runner would have reached 3rd. She gets up, and is put out between 2nd and 3rd. I always thought she was awarded 3rd but the wording here is confusing.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,731
113
An obstructed runner cannot be put out between the 2 bases where obstructed. They are always protected between those 2, except if the commit another infraction such as interference. But, the obstructed runner is also protected to the base or bases the umpire judges they would have reached if not for the obstruction.

So, in the example about the pitcher tackling the runner, the runner cannot be put out between 1st and 2nd. Once that runner goes beyond 2nd they are liable to be put out unless the umpire has judged them to be protected further. If the ball was hit in the gap and the umpire judges the runner would have safely made third and they were tagged out past 2nd, they would still be awarded 3rd.
 
Mar 26, 2013
1,934
0
"If the obstructed runner is put out after passing the base which would have been reached had there not been obstruction or ran beyond the two bases the obstruction occurred, the obstructed runner will be called out. The ball remains live."

What does the "... or ran beyond" clause mean and why is it there?
As Comp explained, they're only out if they've gone beyond both - so the "or" should be "and".

"If the obstructed runner is put out after passing the base which would have been reached had there not been obstruction AND ran beyond the two bases the obstruction occurred."
 

MTR

Jun 22, 2008
3,438
48
"If the obstructed runner is put out after passing the base which would have been reached had there not been obstruction or ran beyond the two bases the obstruction occurred, the obstructed runner will be called out. The ball remains live."

What does the "... or ran beyond" clause mean and why is it there?

The wording is correct. You need to place the paragraph you are citing into context with the rest of the rule. (8.5.B)


Offered are the two scenarios in which an obstructed runner is declared out due to leaving the areas where OBS are usually protected.
 
Sep 26, 2016
6
3
What is with the first exception to the rule though?

An obstructed runner cannot be put out between the 2 bases where obstructed. They are always protected between those 2, except if the commit another infraction such as interference. But, the obstructed runner is also protected to the base or bases the umpire judges they would have reached if not for the obstruction.

Just to be clear the "always" is not completely accurate. In Rule 8 section 5 there are exceptions listed there. Most of them are normal "always an out" types of things - can't interfere with a defensive play, can't go past another runner, can't skip touching a base (if the other team appeals it), need to tag up on a caught fly (again, on appeal). The interesting one, though, is the first one:

1. An Obstructed runner may not be called out between the two bases where obstructed.

EXCEPTIONS:
a. When an obstructed runner, after the obstruction, safely obtains the base they would have been awarded, in the umpire's judgement, had there been no obstruction and there is a subsequent play on a different runner.

[...]

This is an interesting rule, so I'd like to know if I'm reading it right. It sounds like in the scenario above, if the Umpire does not judge that the player could have made it to second safely had there been no obstruction, then the player can be put out, but only if another runner (say the one running to first) is put out between the obstruction and the tag on the obstructed runner.

I'd love to hear the history on this. I mean, is it to stop an obstructed runner from just walking slowly to the next base? It seems like an odd caveat on an otherwise very straightforward (although in my experience here in California rarely taken advantage of) rule.
 
Mar 26, 2013
1,934
0
Just to be clear the "always" is not completely accurate. In Rule 8 section 5 there are exceptions listed there.
Comp couched his "always" with the exceptions - "They are always protected between those 2, except if the commit another infraction such as interference."

I'd love to hear the history on this. I mean, is it to stop an obstructed runner from just walking slowly to the next base? It seems like an odd caveat on an otherwise very straightforward (although in my experience here in California rarely taken advantage of) rule.
MTR is probably your best bet to provide the history. OBS is to rectify what would have occurred if not obstructed, so it makes sense to drop the protection between the 2 bases if they try to advance beyond the base they would be awarded while the defense is attempting a play on another runner.
 
Top