Now that is obstruction.
Now that is obstruction.
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.
You cannot set up blocking a base/plate without the ball--at least in USA/NHFS.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.
Now that is obstruction.
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?
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.