Catcher's obstruction (inteference)

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

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

Jun 6, 2016
2,714
113
Chicago
The real problem is illustrated in the title of this thread. I have no idea why so many people refer to catcher's obstruction as catcher's inference, but they do! If called, and properly thought of, as catcher's obstruction, then it would be treated like any other obstruction - a delayed dead ball. But if thought of incorrectly as catcher's interference, then you may just kill it by calling "dead ball" if you're an umpire, or arguing for a dead ball if you're a parent or spectator.

For two reasons: In baseball, it's catcher's interference, and since that came first, it's what people know.

And, since words matter, by definition, it's an act of interference and not obstruction. I'm not talking the made-up softball definitions. I'm talking the actual English-language definitions. The act itself does not "obstruct" the batter, so I could see how people who know what the two words actually mean could get confused.

As someone who grew up playing baseball, and has too much free time to think I always thought of it as

1. I interfere with someone's ability to make a play on/with the ball. In this case the batter trying to hit the ball

2. I obstruct someone's ability to move.

This is a correct interpretation of what the words mean, but the people who wrote the softball rules had to get it wrong by trying to simplify.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,731
113
For two reasons: In baseball, it's catcher's interference, and since that came first, it's what people know.

And, since words matter, by definition, it's an act of interference and not obstruction. I'm not talking the made-up softball definitions. I'm talking the actual English-language definitions. The act itself does not "obstruct" the batter, so I could see how people who know what the two words actually mean could get confused.



This is a correct interpretation of what the words mean, but the people who wrote the softball rules had to get it wrong by trying to simplify.

Softball got nothing wrong with using the word obstruct in catchers obstruction. The definition of obstruct fits exactly, "prevent or hinder (movement or someone or something in motion)". And by using the term obstruct it keeps the definitions of the 2 completely separate between the offense and defense so they cannot be confused. As has been stated previously, the offense interferes and the defense obstructs.
 
Aug 1, 2019
195
43
South Carolina
...the people who wrote the softball rules had to get it wrong by trying to simplify.

How did they get it wrong? If you're suggesting the softball ruleswriters have to follow their baseball counterparts, why? It's two totally different sports!

They don't call pitching violations "balks". They don't call players who bat for a defensive teammate "designated hitters". Why should they call when a catcher hinders a batter's swing "catcher interference"? Just because that's what it's called in baseball is zero justification.

And it's not a matter of simplification. Rather, it's a matter of consistency. When a fielder hinders a runner, that's obstruction. The same should be the case when a catcher hinders a batter.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,468
Members
21,443
Latest member
sstop28
Top