Obstruction in college (or any other rule set for that matter)?

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

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

Jun 22, 2008
3,731
113
Now that is obstruction.

No way to tell from that still photo if the runner was obstructed or not. If the runner never slowed or altered course and the catcher had possession of the ball prior to the runner getting there it is not obstruction.
 
Nov 29, 2009
2,975
83
No way to tell from that still photo if the runner was obstructed or not. If the runner never slowed or altered course and the catcher had possession of the ball prior to the runner getting there it is not obstruction.

The ball beat the runner and she was called out by the umpire.
 
Mar 15, 2014
191
18
No way to tell from that still photo if the runner was obstructed or not. If the runner never slowed or altered course and the catcher had possession of the ball prior to the runner getting there it is not obstruction.
You cannot set up blocking a base/plate without the ball--at least in USA/NHFS.
Since this is not OBR there is no "act of fielding" to be taken into consideration.
Also, IMHO, the PU is in a bad position to make this call.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,731
113
You cannot set up blocking a base/plate without the ball--at least in USA/NHFS.
Since this is not OBR there is no "act of fielding" to be taken into consideration.
Also, IMHO, the PU is in a bad position to make this call.

Please cite the rule saying it is illegal to block a base without the ball. What you will find is there are 2 parts to the obstruction rule and both must be met in order to have obstruction, a defensive player not in possession of the ball AND impedes the advance of the runner. The catcher is perfectly legal to set up anywhere they like and there is nothing illegal about it. What they cant do is impede the progress of the runner without the ball, until the runner is actually impeded you have nothing. If the runner in the photo never slowed, altered course or showed any other sign of being impeded in their advance it is absolutely nothing.

Obstruction is covered rather extensively in the rules and plays on the USA website. It even talks about umpires misinterpreting the rule and applying it to situation where the base was blocked but the runner never impeded. In order to have obstruction both criteria must be met, a defensive player not in possession of the ball and not fielding a batted ball and they impede the runner from advancing.
 

MTR

Jun 22, 2008
3,438
48
Now that is obstruction.

Nope. As Comp noted, if the runner is not affected, there is no OBS.

It really needs to be noted, blocking a base without the ball is NOT a violation of the rules.
 
May 17, 2012
2,804
113
Now that is obstruction.

In my mind that ball gets there before the runner does. Since the runner has already committed to the straight slide (didn't slow up, didn't hook slide) I don't see any obstruction (in my mind). Just a picture though.

My question is if the catcher drops the ball, assuming the runner slides into the catcher but short of the plate, would obstruction be called?
 
Mar 14, 2017
453
43
Michigan
Comp, is there a timing aspect to the runner altering their course? Just for hypotheticals, what if the catcher set up to block the plate really early, and the runner recognized it really early. The catcher is blocking the plate while the cut off is beginning to throw home, and the runner recognizes a pending close play at the plate and sees the catcher has the plate blocked just after rounding 3rd. If the runner visibly alters course to avoid the blocked plate can you call obstruction?

In this scenario it is possible that the ball will beat the runner to the plate, but has she been obstructed if she changed course prior to the catcher being in possession even if she's 40 feet from the plate?

It seems like the criteria is being met, but not the spirit of the rule.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,731
113
In my mind that ball gets there before the runner does. Since the runner has already committed to the straight slide (didn't slow up, didn't hook slide) I don't see any obstruction (in my mind). Just a picture though.

My question is if the catcher drops the ball, assuming the runner slides into the catcher but short of the plate, would obstruction be called?

Should be, yes. Once the catcher does not have the ball they cant impede the runner.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,731
113
Comp, is there a timing aspect to the runner altering their course? Just for hypotheticals, what if the catcher set up to block the plate really early, and the runner recognized it really early. The catcher is blocking the plate while the cut off is beginning to throw home, and the runner recognizes a pending close play at the plate and sees the catcher has the plate blocked just after rounding 3rd. If the runner visibly alters course to avoid the blocked plate can you call obstruction?

In this scenario it is possible that the ball will beat the runner to the plate, but has she been obstructed if she changed course prior to the catcher being in possession even if she's 40 feet from the plate?

It seems like the criteria is being met, but not the spirit of the rule.

Not a chance Im calling obstruction when a runner is still 40, 50 or 60' away from a base. In fact, that is exactly what the USA clarification is stating about umpires misinterpreting the rule when they were calling obstruction when the runner was still a good distance from the base. That is where the 2 criteria of the rule come into play, simply blocking the base is not illegal, impeding the runner without the ball is what is illegal.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,481
Members
21,445
Latest member
Bmac81802
Top