Is this obstruction?

[bmakj]

they have their helmets on with face masks, run through the glove (maybe with very aggressive pumping of arms with elbows out as they run ) after first time, blue likely issues warning. after second, 3B and possibly coach will be tossed.

pretty bush league IMHO

play softball, not trickery on how far I can push envelope on rules.

 

[jackfrost]

Since the runner was not impeded, there is no obstruction.

What I said in my original response was as soon as I see the runner move her head to look around the glove in her face, I have obstruction. You are right. Something has to happen to actually call the obstruction.

 

[jackfrost]

You're absolutely right. But, in this case I think it's also correct that you would very rarely get a call without making some type of attempt to advance or at least show that you would have made some attempt if you hadn't been obstructed. Speaking for myself, I would not call obstruction if the runner is moving back towards 3B as the possible obstruction occurs.

What I said in my original response was as soon as I see the runner move her head to look around the glove in her face, I have obstruction. That's all I would need to show hindering. You are right. Something has to happen to actually call the obstruction.

 

[Big Daddy Michigan]

What I said in my original response was as soon as I see the runner move her head to look around the glove in her face, I have obstruction. That's all I would need to show hindering. You are right. Something has to happen to actually call the obstruction.

My only thought is the OP said the runner was standing between between the bases. If the runner isn't trying to advance how can you say they were obstructed?

As an offensive coach I'd tell the runner to run through her arm. That way you can ask the umpire, "Is she allowed to clothesline my runner like that?" I'd bet that would solve it one way or the other.

 

[jackfrost]

My only thought is the OP said the runner was standing between between the bases. If the runner isn't trying to advance how can you say they were obstructed?

As an offensive coach I'd tell the runner to run through her arm. That way you can ask the umpire, "Is she allowed to clothesline my runner like that?" I'd bet that would solve it one way or the other.

Agree, as a coach I would be telling my runner to force the obstruction call.

But as an umpire, any motion of the runner caused by the fielder being in her way, including having to look around the glove, would be enough for me to call call OBS.

 

[Big Daddy Michigan]

Agree, as a coach I would be telling my runner to force the obstruction call.

But as an umpire, any motion of the runner caused by the fielder being in her way, including having to look around the glove, would be enough for me to call call OBS.

OK so the runner is stopped and the catcher has the ball (per OP's description). You call obstruction and award her the base you determine she would have taken had she not been obstructed- which is third. So it's pretty pointless.

 

[jackfrost]

OK so the runner is stopped and the catcher has the ball (per OP's description). You call obstruction and award her the base you determine she would have taken had she not been obstructed- which is third. So it's pretty pointless.

Not pointless. If they were to tag the runner out, runner would not be out. Runner also now has a free attempt at home. Get in a rundown and force them to make good throws. Maybe get lucky. Playing with house money at that point.

 

[radness]

Agree, as a coach I would be telling my runner to force the obstruction call.

But as an umpire, any motion of the runner caused by the fielder being in her way, including having to look around the glove, would be enough for me to call call OBS.

So this is actually saying
Runner do something to get the umpires attention there is a hinderance on the field.

Saying as an umpire they would see the slighter runner adjustment - leaning around to see.

However, perhaps, knowing not all umpires may react to the small things...
As a coach make it more obvious by having contact.

 

[jackfrost]

So this is actually saying
Runner do something to get the umpires attention there is a hinderance on the field.

Saying as an umpire they would see the slighter runner adjustment - leaning around to see.

However, perhaps, knowing not all umpires may react to the small things...
As a coach make it more obvious by having contact.

yeah. just don't do anything flagrant/malicious.

 

[CoachJD]

You're absolutely right. But, in this case I think it's also correct that you would very rarely get a call without making some type of attempt to advance or at least show that you would have made some attempt if you hadn't been obstructed. Speaking for myself, I would not call obstruction if the runner is moving back towards 3B as the possible obstruction occurs.

You don't need to make an "attempt to advance." You can be obstructed on an attempt to retreat. Refusing to call obstruction when she's going back to third makes no sense. What if they tag her out?