Dropped third

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

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

Jan 24, 2011
144
0
Texas
The umpire is correct. This is actually call the "3rd Strike Rule", not the "Dropped 3rd Strike Rule". Many times, umpires will refer to it as the Uncaught 3rd Strike Rule.

It is real simple. If the ball must go directly from the pitcher's hand to the catcher's glove/hand and be caught for the 3rd strike in flight to cause the batter to be ruled out.

Absolutely correct MTR. It never ceases to amaze me that Coaches continually forget or don't know about this rule. They believe anything that is caught cleanly nullifies this rule.

Here's some dogpiling on the subject:

ASA rules during a travel ball tournament. I'm the PU.

I had a girl who's dugout was on the 3B side. With two strikes and no one on base, she swings at one in the dirt. It clearly one hops into catchers glove who holds on to it. I do not call her out, I just signal strike and verbalize Strike 3. She begins walking to her dugout, catcher returns the ball to pitcher. It was only the 2nd out, so as sometimes girls do, they begin to converge on the circle to congratulate their pitcher on the strikeout (14U). Before the batter reaches the dugout, her coach yells at her to run to first base. She was almost to the dugout, so, she drops her bat and begins running. (A few more steps and my job would have been much easier)

Mayhem ensues.

As she's running across the diamond from 3B side, the other coach now quickly yells for the F3 to go back to 1B with the ball. Batter is running across the diamond at this point with a bunch of girls in the middle scattering like bugs. F3 goes back to 1B without the ball which now requires a throw from P who had it. Batter is dodging girls and the throw beats the batter by about 4-5 feet.

BU awards an out.

Offensive coach immediately comes over and argues obstruction.

After a meeting together, we ultimately stick with the out call, it was close, but both of us believed there wasn't enough for OBS.

How's all that for some fun in the sun? :)
 
Jun 22, 2010
203
16
Batter is dodging girls . . . .
Offensive coach immediately comes over and argues obstruction.

After a meeting together, we ultimately stick with the out call, it was close, but both of us believed there wasn't enough for OBS.
I wasn't there, so I'm not questioning your judgment, but if I can ask, to help with my own learning: what made you decide there wasn't obstruction, if she was "dodging girls?"
 
Aug 29, 2011
2,584
83
NorCal
I wasn't there, so I'm not questioning your judgment, but if I can ask, to help with my own learning: what made you decide there wasn't obstruction, if she was "dodging girls?"

I wasn't there either but from the description it sounds like she was cutting accross the middle of the diamond and not anywhere near a baseline. I don't think I'd have called obstrution on a play like that either.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,757
113
Runner can pick any line they want to use to run to a base, baseline has nothing to do with any requirement to run on it. If defensive players without posession of the ball were in the runners path, and she was "dodging" them, Im not sure how you could not have called obstruction.
 

Greenmonsters

Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
Feb 21, 2009
6,165
38
New England
Runner can pick any line they want to use to run to a base, baseline has nothing to do with any requirement to run on it. If defensive players without posession of the ball were in the runners path, and she was "dodging" them, Im not sure how you could not have called obstruction.

Given this absurdity, why wouldn't a coach direct any batter with a dropped 3rd strkie to immediately run directly at and bump into the Catcher or any other nearby fielder and similarly claim that the defensive player was obstructing the batter/runner from reaching 1st base along the path of the batter's choosing???
 

MTR

Jun 22, 2008
3,438
48
Given this absurdity, why wouldn't a coach direct any batter with a dropped 3rd strkie to immediately run directly at and bump into the Catcher or any other nearby fielder and similarly claim that the defensive player was obstructing the batter/runner from reaching 1st base along the path of the batter's choosing???

Because that isn't OBS. It may actually be unsportsmanlike conduct and get the runner ejected.

OBS is the impedement of a runner attempting to advance to a base. If s/he is running at a player, s/he is no longer attempting to advance to a base.
 

Greenmonsters

Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
Feb 21, 2009
6,165
38
New England
Because that isn't OBS. It may actually be unsportsmanlike conduct and get the runner ejected.

OBS is the impedement of a runner attempting to advance to a base. If s/he is running at a player, s/he is no longer attempting to advance to a base.

MTR - I completely agree with you; however, is this scenario any more riduculous than the post to which I responded??? For those with short memories like mine, it involved the awarding of obstruction to Little Red Ridiing Hood who lost her way and subsequently had to dodge players in the middle of the diamond trying to get to Grandma's house.
 
Aug 29, 2011
2,584
83
NorCal
MTR - I completely agree with you; however, is this scenario any more riduculous than the post to which I responded??? For those with short memories like mine, it involved the awarding of obstruction to Little Red Ridiing Hood who lost her way and subsequently had to dodge players in the middle of the diamond trying to get to Grandma's house.

yes thank you. this puts it much more eloquently than I could have.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,757
113
MTR - I completely agree with you; however, is this scenario any more riduculous than the post to which I responded??? For those with short memories like mine, it involved the awarding of obstruction to Little Red Ridiing Hood who lost her way and subsequently had to dodge players in the middle of the diamond trying to get to Grandma's house.

Little red riding hood as you have put it, was legally running the bases. She does not have to run on the baseline, and she was not purposely trying to run into the defense.

Obstruction
Obstruction is the act of a fielder:
A. Not in possession of the ball, or
B. Not in the act of fielding a batted ball,
which impedes the progress of a batter-runner or runner who is legally running the bases.

So, you have a batter-runner who is legally running to 1st base and now has to "dodge" a fielder not in possession of the ball. I believe everyone here would agree that having to dodge a defensive player (who was not in possession of the ball) would constitute being impeded. If she is legally running the bases, which she was, it is obstruction.
 
Aug 29, 2011
2,584
83
NorCal
And I think everyone esle would agree that fielders standing near the circle would have zero expecation of "impeeding a baserunner" nor should they.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
42,857
Messages
680,277
Members
21,525
Latest member
Go_Ask_Mom
Top