Interference call in the Auburn vs. UGA game

[corlay]

So, yes, there is a little bit more to it than that! Personally, considering the rule set in effect, this didn't seem to me to be obstruction.

thanks for clarifying the NCAA rule.
i was not aware of that difference

 

[ian]

No contact with runner before the catcher had the ball.

No obstruction.

 

[Tatonka]

Looked like a clean play by Wallace for what should have been the out.

 

[CoogansBluff]

No contact with runner before the catcher had the ball.

I don't think contact is a requirement for obstruction here. Just needs to impede the runner, force her out of her natural attempt to reach the base, if I understand correctly.

A question for me is whether the base-runner was impeded by the catcher's presence. The catcher was blocking the plate long before she was 'about' to catch it. Her mere presence can intimidate a base-runner who sees there is no way to avoid a collision. So, is a catcher allowed to intimidate a runner (cause her to be timid by putting up a road block) when not in the act of catching the ball? Couldn't an umpire judge that this is obstruction?

 

[ian]

I don't think contact is a requirement for obstruction here. Just needs to impede the runner, force her out of her natural attempt to reach the base, if I understand correctly.

A question for me is whether the base-runner was impeded by the catcher's presence. The catcher was blocking the plate long before she was 'about' to catch it. Her mere presence can intimidate a base-runner who sees there is no way to avoid a collision. So, is a catcher allowed to intimidate a runner (cause her to be timid by putting up a road block) when not in the act of catching the ball? Couldn't an umpire judge that this is obstruction?

Wow, are you saying the catcher mentally impeded the runner?? I'll try that argument next time there is a close play at home.

"But Blue she would have beat the ball and the tag but the catcher was standing by home plate!"

 

[CoogansBluff]

Wow, are you saying the catcher mentally impeded the runner?? I'll try that argument next time there is a close play at home.

"But Blue she would have beat the ball and the tag but the catcher was standing by home plate!"

The argument would be that the runner slowed down, even if only slightly, to avoid contact with a fielder who had no right to be there.

Not saying the mere fact of intimidation is enough, but rather the physical action, or change of course, that resulted from intimidation.

If the catcher is in the path before she's legally allowed, then perhaps the benefit of the doubt goes to the runner.

Also, technically speaking, I was not ''saying'' as much as I was ''asking,'' as there are multiple ? marks in my original post.

 

[slugger3]

OK, how about the play at home that just happened?...

 

[STRIKE3]

I didn't think the obstruction call was warranted after watching it several times and would probably have to side with Auburn on this one.

 

[MTR]

IMO, good call. And yes I'm an Auburn fan.

The call is to a level of what umpires may call OOO, over-officious officiating. IMJ, this was not OBS in any rule set

How many injuries have been caused by a "gray area" call/interpretation such as this? It should be a black and white call.

Very little grey about it if you understand the rule. OBS is one of the easiest calls in the book.

IMO, either call interference/obstruction every time on this situation, to reduce these types of plays where major injuries can occur due to collisions.

So, you don't know the rules. Why not just use a second home plate and make all plays at the plate a "force out"? And no, I'm not kidding as this is already being done in different levels of the SP game.

Or open it up wide open like in ML baseball, and turn it into "The Pete Rose highlight reel" and turn the blocking catchers into bowling pins. By allowing the runner to get to the home plate by "whatever means necessary" when it is "blocked/obstructed" by the catcher.

This is ludicrous in baseball, even more so in softball

How many times have you seen a catcher block/obstruct a plate, like in this game, where the runner comes sliding in to maneuver around them to touch the blocked plate, and then the catcher lays down a punch tag and drives the runner into the ground? While the runners leg is twisted like silly putty around the braced catcher's legs.
It seems a little one sided to me... and yes, one of my DDs catches.
JMO

IN spite of the call, the catcher did NOT obstruct the runner on the play in question

 

[slugger3]

MTR, I posted a ludicrous statement like that on purpose...because we all know that is never going to happen. . And I will gladly take some punches on this one...
And yes, I may not know the rules as you say.

But what I would really like is for someone to post a video gif of what is truly considered blatant obstruction. And then we can compare the 2 gif's.
Or how about several gif's to show us varying degrees of OBS.
Not just a numerical statute, but video of what you think should be obstruction.
MTR, how often is this actually called in higher level college games these days.
MTR, can you give us a typed explanation, or maybe a gif, of what you consider obstruction?
That'd be great!
(And trust me, no sarcasm in this post)
Thanks