NCAA Obstruction rule change

[CoachJD]

I find the new wording to be almost impossible to parse.

And the part about ignoring obstruction if the runner would've been clearly out shows the idiots who are writing this don't understand either the word "obstruction" or the purpose of the rule in the first place. You shouldn't need that caveat because, if the runner would have been "clearly out," then she wasn't being obstructed in the first place!

What's wild about this is the obstruction rule is completely clear in every other rule set in softball and baseball (OK, maybe not NCAA baseball; I admittedly have no idea what the rule says there). They keep muddying the waters for no reason when we have a perfectly good rule and some variations on those rules that all make sense and are easy to understand and enforce everywhere else.

 

[The Man In Blue]

I find the new wording to be almost impossible to parse.

And the part about ignoring obstruction if the runner would've been clearly out shows the idiots who are writing this don't understand either the word "obstruction" or the purpose of the rule in the first place. You shouldn't need that caveat because, if the runner would have been "clearly out," then she wasn't being obstructed in the first place!

I simultaneously agree and disagree. While I agree that it obviously shouldn't be considered an obstruction if the runner clearly would have been out, that is NOT how the rules have been written and applied in the past. This is why astute coaches would send runners who were not going to make it: they predicted the obstruction that was going to happen when they would see the path of their runner and the fielder's position.

The rules did allow for a runner to be called out if they advanced beyond their protection (where the umpire judged they would have safely made it). I.e., a runner obstructed between first and second may have had a chance at reaching third base, so we might protect the runner to there (NOT AWARD). If they get greedy and head for home though, there is no way they would have gotten that, so we ring them up on the play at the plate.

Here is the provision I never liked though . . . an obstructed runner CANNOT be called out between the two bases where the obstruction occurred. SO . . . On the pitch, R2 busts for 3B on the steal. R2 is not watching the plate, but has to sidestep F6. The batter lines the ball to F5 who makes the catch, runs over to 2B, and steps on the base to double up R2. However, R2 CANNOT be called out. The obstruction had nothing to do with the play. I suppose this "clearly would have been out" provision could fix that.

 

[CoachJD]

Here is the provision I never liked though . . . an obstructed runner CANNOT be called out between the two bases where the obstruction occurred. SO . . . On the pitch, R2 busts for 3B on the steal. R2 is not watching the plate, but has to sidestep F6. The batter lines the ball to F5 who makes the catch, runs over to 2B, and steps on the base to double up R2. However, R2 CANNOT be called out. The obstruction had nothing to do with the play. I suppose this "clearly would have been out" provision could fix that.

It could, sure. I think that's a good example of when the obstruction shouldn't matter. While technically that is a judgment call, I think we'd all agree that it's an obvious one.

My concern is that we now introduce even more subjectivity for the umpires, something we (and by we I mean umpires, coaches, players, everyone) should not want to do. Not an umpire has to go "well, she was only two steps past third base when the obstruction occurred, and the ball beat her home by quite a bit, so now she's out." Another umpire might think the obstruction caused her to be out. "Clearly" clearly means different things to different people.

My question to the writers of the rule would be "What problem is this trying to solve?" And since it's NCAA, I imagine there was a single play in a high-profile game that was the catalyst for the change since that's how they decide all their rule changes, it seems.

 

[marriard]

So glad I am not officiating as much college this year as in the past. I can't get a clear explanation from anyone high up that doesn't contradict someone else who is also high up. I expected to see video examples by this point where the ruling would be different from previous years and I haven't yet.

 

[Comp]

Here is the provision I never liked though . . . an obstructed runner CANNOT be called out between the two bases where the obstruction occurred. SO . . . On the pitch, R2 busts for 3B on the steal. R2 is not watching the plate, but has to sidestep F6. The batter lines the ball to F5 who makes the catch, runs over to 2B, and steps on the base to double up R2. However, R2 CANNOT be called out. The obstruction had nothing to do with the play. I suppose this "clearly would have been out" provision could fix that.

That is not entirely correct. Every ruleset does have exceptions to when a runner that has been obstructed can be called out between the 2 bases where obstructed. Interference always takes precedence over obstruction in every ruleset. NFHS it makes a difference which direction a runner is headed when obstructed on a caught fly ball. A runner advancing when obstructed is not protect while returning to tag up. They are protected if obstructed while returning. Im pretty sure USSSA has same ruling as they tend to follow NFHS rules for the most part. USA the obstructed runner can be called out on a caught fly ball if the umpire judges they would not have returned safely anyway. Been a long time since I went through the NCAA rules but my recollection is they were the same as NFHS on caught fly balls.

 

[The Man In Blue]

Here is the provision I never liked though . . . an obstructed runner CANNOT be called out between the two bases where the obstruction occurred. SO . . . On the pitch, R2 busts for 3B on the steal. R2 is not watching the plate, but has to sidestep F6. The batter lines the ball to F5 who makes the catch, runs over to 2B, and steps on the base to double up R2. However, R2 CANNOT be called out. The obstruction had nothing to do with the play. I suppose this "clearly would have been out" provision could fix that.

That is not entirely correct. Every ruleset does have exceptions to when a runner that has been obstructed can be called out between the 2 bases where obstructed. Interference always takes precedence over obstruction in every ruleset. NFHS it makes a difference which direction a runner is headed when obstructed on a caught fly ball. A runner advancing when obstructed is not protect while returning to tag up. They are protected if obstructed while returning. Im pretty sure USSSA has same ruling as they tend to follow NFHS rules for the most part. USA the obstructed runner can be called out on a caught fly ball if the umpire judges they would not have returned safely anyway. Been a long time since I went through the NCAA rules but my recollection is they were the same as NFHS on caught fly balls.

Total brain fart. Yes.

Maybe it is time for me to hang it up. My batteries are not recharging and my interest in next season is . . . bordering on apathetic.

EDIT: I was going to put a strikethrough on that section of my original post . . . but I am not able to edit it. Why is that? There is no "edit" button on the post for me anymore.

 

[Northball]

...Maybe it is time for me to hang it up....

 

[The Man In Blue]

 

[dogpatch]

I believe that NCAA totally failed when they went to the previous obstruction rule. That rule intended to reduce injury, but was very poorly though through. It opened the door to ridiculous interpretation. The current new rule is obviously an attempt at damage control after seeing silly interpretations of obstruction by umpires occur on a regular basis!

 

[Comp]

I believe that NCAA totally failed when they went to the previous obstruction rule. That rule intended to reduce injury, but was very poorly though through. It opened the door to ridiculous interpretation. The current new rule is obviously an attempt at damage control after seeing silly interpretations of obstruction by umpires occur on a regular basis!

It wasnt silly umpire interpretations, that was directly from NCAA. There were even reviews that went to national that they made the ridiculous obstruction calls. There were at least 2 I can think of in the WCWS last year. Remember, the coaches make the rules in NCAA, the previous rule was as a result of Lisa Fernandez losing her mind at the WCWS several years ago and bumping an official over a non obstruction call. That was the coaches knee jerk reaction to that call and they decided any defender in front of a base without the ball regardless of how far away the runner was was automatic obstruction. They made the rule and the officials had no choice but to enforce exactly what they asked for.