Obstruction / out for initiating contact?

[fastpitch]

Batter hits a line drive single to LF. As she makes the turn on 1st to look to see if she can go to 2B she bumps into the first baseman who was on the bag. Not that hard. Just enough I think for everyone to notice first basemen was blocking her path if she wanted to go to 2B. First basemen had one foot on the bag waiting to receive a throw that was not coming. Ball is returned from outfield to infield so batter/runner returns back to 1B after rounding the bag. Umpire gives a warning to the runner for drawing contact and said she should have avoided the first baseman when rounding the bag.

He says she could be called out for that but in this case he is giving a warning.

Is that correct? Does anyone have the rule?

Should base runners be instructed to avoid contact when rounding 1B? (or any base for that matter?)

 

[FPMark]

Any fielder that does not have the ball, or is not recieving the ball, cannot block the base. Since the ball went to the out field, the 1st baseman must get out of the way of the runner. This is a well known rule, which makes me wonder if something else was going on. If the fielder gives enough room for the runner to get by unobstructed in the umpires opinion, and the runner goes out of her way to make contact, the umpire can call the runner out and even eject her from the game. But it's hard to say if I didn't see it. Avoiding contact is always the best idea, if possible.

 

[fastpitch]

Any fielder that does not have the ball, or is not recieving the ball, cannot block the base. Since the ball went to the out field, the 1st baseman must get out of the way of the runner. This is a well known rule, which makes me wonder if something else was going on.

This is what I thought as well...

If the fielder gives enough room for the runner to get by unobstructed in the umpires opinion, and the runner goes out of her way to make contact, the umpire can call the runner out and even eject her from the game. But it's hard to say if I didn't see it. Avoiding contact is always the best idea, if possible.

The ump said the rule was they can't initiate the contact. Even if the fielder is blocking the base; the ump will call the obstruction if the runner has to go out of their way to get to the next base and in his judgment they could have made it without the obstruction. In this case the fielder didn't leave the base and the runner made contact as she was rounding the base.

 

[BretMan]

Was this a high school game?

Back a few years ago, NFHS modified the wording of their interference rule to say that a runner who makes contact with a fielder that could have been avoided can be guilty of interference- even if the ball is nowhere near the fielder and no play is being made on the runner.

This really goes against the grain of the interference rules in every other sanctioning body. I can remember back when the rule was changed there was a lot of talk about all the possible ways this could be misinterpreted and how it changed a fundamental element of the game. In actual practice, I really haven't seen interference or obstruction called any differently on these plays than they were before. I can't recall seeing any case of interference "without a play" being called in a high school game.

I believe that this was done to address a runner purposely slamming into a fielder when the runner had ample time and opportunity to avoid them. While a runner purposely crashing into a fielder could always be judged as unsportsmanlike, it wasn't necessarily an out if no play was being made. The newer version of the rule allows an out to be accessed to dissuade such contact.

On your play...unless I thought that the runner purposely altered her path to contact the fielder, I can't see interference being called. The runner was doing exactly what she is expected to do- rounding the base on a ball hit to the outfield- and the fielder really has no business standing on the bag if no throw is coming there.

Sounds like obstruction to me...

 

[fastpitch]

Was this a high school game?

It was a 14U scrimmage between two travel/club teams playing by ASA rules.

Since the defense got the ball back in quickly; I guess it could be argued that the runner really never had a chance to make it to 2B so she didn't have to round the bag the way she did and could have avoided contact. In my judgment it didn't appear to be excessive contact. Just enough to show the girl was in the way.

I was just surprised that the ump said he could call her out for what she did and wanted to understand the rule better. I had never heard of that.

 

[BretMan]

In that case, under ASA rules no out could possibly be accessed here. Your only options would be:

- An out for interference ONLY if the runner's actions prevented a play (apparently not the case on this one).

- Ejection for unsportsmanlike conduct ONLY if the runner's actions were judged as a deliberate attempt to injure the fielder (apparently not the case either).

- Obstruction against the fielder.

I'm picking number three!

 

[Coach661]

In that case, under ASA rules no out could possibly be accessed here. Your only options would be:

- An out for interference ONLY if the runner's actions prevented a play (apparently not the case on this one).

- Ejection for unsportsmanlike conduct ONLY if the runner's actions were judged as a deliberate attempt to injure the fielder (apparently not the case either).

- Obstruction against the fielder.

I'm picking number three!

Bretman,
I'm not sure that I'm right on this but I want to understand obstruction calls better. In this case, assuming the umpire gets it right(which I don't think they did in this case), an obstruction isn't called till the runner is first obstructed then makes an attempt on the next base and is called out? Or could you argue that your runner got obstructed therefore, didn't make an attempt? Maybe both ways?

 

[Amy in AZ.]

"Or could you argue that your runner got obstructed therefore, didn't make an attempt? Maybe both ways?"

Having played 1st base forever - I say "yes." A little off topic, but most first basemen seem glued to the base way too soon. They should straddle a corner, wait for the throw to be released (to see if they have to jump, stretch, move, etc.), catch, reach back and touch the base with their toe and get off the bag.

 

[lawdawg]

BMAN- let's add a wrinkle:
If the throw from the outfield in this case was an attempt to pick off runner who had rounded and was caught too far off - don't you think 1b has right to set up for pick off throw? I agree she should get out of way for initial rounding but she better be prepared to receive throw and tag runner who rounded and may have strayed too far.

Not suggesting that happened here - only to defend a 1b who is still holding close to her bag and possibly still in the play.

 

[BretMan]

Coach661: Obstruction should be signalled and called the instant it happens. Whether the runner tries to advance or not has zero bearing on the call.

Since there is no "automatic" base award for obstruction, it really doesn't matter if the runner tried to advance or not. At the end of the play, the umpire will place the runner at whichever base the umpire judges she would have reached had she not been obstructed. On this play, that "might" be second. If the umpire judges that the runner would not have safely reached second, she would remain at first base.


lawdawg: I guess you could say that F3 has the "right" to set-up anywhere on the field she pleases.

What she does not have the right to do is impede the runner without possession of the ball. So, if F3 positions herself for a throw, and that positioning impedes the runner from getting back to the base before the ball gets there, the fielder is guilty of obstruction.