Someone please explain this to me.

[Comp]

As I have a DD that catches, Ask 20 umpires and get 20 answers. For ASA rules the fielder at any base CAN NOT block more than 75% of the base. The catcher can not be established in front (blocking the plate) of the plate before the ball is thrown or you get the obstruction call. Once the throw is in the air the catcher may go to the ball if contact is made it is call incidental contact ( no call ). Once the catcher has the ball than everything is fare game. With that being said good luck trying to find two umpires to make the same call.

Incorrect, incorrect and incorrect. The only thing partially correct is once the catch has the ball....

For ALL rule sets I am familiar with, nothing in the rules say anything about a portion of the base must be left open. The rule also does not say anything about a defender may not block a base. Defenders may play anywhere they like, but, they may not hinder the runner without posession of the ball. Defenders can stand in front of the bases all they want, they just cant impede the progress of the runner if they dont have the ball. About to receive a throw is only an NCAA rule. If a throw draws a defender into the path of the runner and hinders them, it is obstruction. The defender is not in posession of the ball. Once a defender has the ball, yes then they can block the base all they want but not everything is fair game. They cannot commit an unsporting act such has an excessively hard tag etc.

 

[HugoTafurst]

Timothy, I will check back with our HC and ask if that could have been the case. I never heard anything said about the catcher interfering in the batters swing howver that would make more since to how this was handled. I do know that the PU specifically stated Interference and not Obstruction.

From what I have read so far, the play was completely misruled (if that's a word) and yes, the umpire made a huge mistake.
On the subject of the proper words...
I worry about using the proper word (obstruction/interference) when I am describing something because I know better. The more people that use the proper terminology, the better.
However when someone else is describing something to me and mixes the two up, I don't get too excited. I just try to question them to make sure of what they are saying so I know which it is and what the ruling should be.

<rant on> As to the term "Catcher's Interference" (as opopsed to "cather's obstruction") I believe that is the proper term MLB rules (from which LL is derived), the use of that term exemplifies ONE of my umpiring pet peeves which is baseball umpires who are being paid to umpire a SOFTBALL game and insist on using baseball rules and mechanics<rant off>

 

[MTR]

As I have a DD that catches, Ask 20 umpires and get 20 answers. For ASA rules the fielder at any base CAN NOT block more than 75% of the base. The catcher can not be established in front (blocking the plate) of the plate before the ball is thrown or you get the obstruction call. Once the throw is in the air the catcher may go to the ball if contact is made it is call incidental contact ( no call ). Once the catcher has the ball than everything is fare game. With that being said good luck trying to find two umpires to make the same call.

Speaking ASA

Aaaahhhhh....nope. Don't know where you got your umpires, but I can easily get you 50 umpires that will all give you the same ruling.

To start, there is no rule forbidding a defender from blocking a base. Pure myth in spite of ASA's weak wording in their RS. There is, however, a rule which forbids any defender from obstructing any runner anywhere on the field if not in possession of the ball or in the act of fielding a batter ball.

That's it. Not nearly as convoluted as some people want to make it seem. Quite easy if you just follow the rule. Don't try to out think it, good possibility it will be incorrect.

 

[darken]

To start, there is no rule forbidding a defender from blocking a base. Pure myth in spite of ASA's weak wording in their RS. There is, however, a rule which forbids any defender from obstructing any runner anywhere on the field if not in possession of the ball or in the act of fielding a batter ball.

So, if I can temporarily hijack this thread based on this description of obstruction....

If a defensive player obstructs a runner while fielding a thrown ball (for example, throw from F2 to F5/F6 on a steal of 3rd by R1 draws the fielder toward 2nd base and there is contact with the runner), should an umpire call obstruction and award bases to the runner if warranted by the degree of obstruction? Reason I ask is that umpires, in my experience, are very inconsistent in this and similar situations.

 

[Comp]

So, if I can temporarily hijack this thread based on this description of obstruction....

If a defensive player obstructs a runner while fielding a thrown ball (for example, throw from F2 to F5/F6 on a steal of 3rd by R1 draws the fielder toward 2nd base and there is contact with the runner), should an umpire call obstruction and award bases to the runner if warranted by the degree of obstruction? Reason I ask is that umpires, in my experience, are very inconsistent in this and similar situations.

If the defensive player was not fielding a batted ball, they do not have the right to impede the progress of the runner. The play you have described is definitely obstruction, and, contact is not necessary for it to be obstruction. If the throw pulls the defensive player into the path of the runner and they hesitate, pull up, attempt to go around etc, it is obstruction. Yes the umpire should call obstruction and award the base or bases the runner or runners would have reached absent the obstruction.

 

[MTR]

So, if I can temporarily hijack this thread based on this description of obstruction....

If a defensive player obstructs a runner while fielding a thrown ball (for example, throw from F2 to F5/F6 on a steal of 3rd by R1 draws the fielder toward 2nd base and there is contact with the runner), should an umpire call obstruction and award bases to the runner if warranted by the degree of obstruction? Reason I ask is that umpires, in my experience, are very inconsistent in this and similar situations.

The post you sited is the answer to your question. In your scenario, does the fielder have possession of the ball at the time of the obstruction? Obviously, it is not a batted ball. Like I said, it is easy.