UCLA vs LSU Obstruction Call

[djcarter1966]

I guess my question is if the coach sends the player and throw beats her by a step or a couple of steps, is she just supposed to stop and be tagged out? Whats the distance you should be out by, when you should just stop and be tagged? I agree that you should be able to tag the runner anywhere you want, but the runner cant just stop and be tagged. Can't go around, your out of base line. Cant give up and tell the coach, hey that's your fault, you should have known i couldn't make it. There will always be arguments when they give crappy wording in a rule book. I go back and forth on it in my head. Just don't think someone with all the protective gear should be able to block someone that has very little protection.

My DD always just rounded as hard as she could headed home and made a nice hard feet first slide right into home. If the throw beat her fine nothing she could do about it. If she beat the throw and the catcher was blocking the plate the odds are she did not catch the ball but if she did it was an easy obstruction call because she slide into the catcher full speed and somehow did not manage to get to the plate then the catcher reaches down to tag her so there is not much doubt she was obstructed.

 

[Comp]

MTR, Bretman and myself have covered this numerous times in other threads. Im not going to speak for them on my personal opinion regarding this play, but they may post themselves.

There are 2 parts to the obstruction rule, both must be met to have obstruction. 1, a fielder not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding a batted ball (in NCAA add in in the immediate act of catching a thrown ball) AND 2, impede the runner. If both aspects are not met then you do not have obstruction. In the play posted, the runner never changes course, she never slows and goes directly for the plate. She never showed any signs of her progress being impeded. The catcher receives and is in possession of the ball prior to the contact, completely legal. I would not have obstruction in any rule set based on that play.

There is no rule about allowing a path to the plate, or where the defense can set up. The rule is not nearly as difficult as everyone tries to make it, the defense can be where ever they want to be, but, they may not impede the runner without possession of the ball. If the runner never shows any sign of being impeded by the fielders location, then it is not obstruction.

 

[eagle6]

MTR, Bretman and myself have covered this numerous times in other threads. Im not going to speak for them on my personal opinion regarding this play, but they may post themselves.

There are 2 parts to the obstruction rule, both must be met to have obstruction. 1, a fielder not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding a batted ball (in NCAA add in in the immediate act of catching a thrown ball) AND 2, impede the runner. If both aspects are not met then you do not have obstruction. In the play posted, the runner never changes course, she never slows and goes directly for the plate. She never showed any signs of her progress being impeded. The catcher receives and is in possession of the ball prior to the contact, completely legal. I would not have obstruction in any rule set based on that play.

There is no rule about allowing a path to the plate, or where the defense can set up. The rule is not nearly as difficult as everyone tries to make it, the defense can be where ever they want to be, but, they may not impede the runner without possession of the ball. If the runner never shows any sign of being impeded by the fielders location, then it is not obstruction.

does this mean the runner must initiate some form of contact in order for the obstruction to occur? thanks

 

[ScottyDont]

MTR, Bretman and myself have covered this numerous times in other threads. Im not going to speak for them on my personal opinion regarding this play, but they may post themselves.

There are 2 parts to the obstruction rule, both must be met to have obstruction. 1, a fielder not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding a batted ball (in NCAA add in in the immediate act of catching a thrown ball) AND 2, impede the runner. If both aspects are not met then you do not have obstruction. In the play posted, the runner never changes course, she never slows and goes directly for the plate. She never showed any signs of her progress being impeded. The catcher receives and is in possession of the ball prior to the contact, completely legal. I would not have obstruction in any rule set based on that play.

There is no rule about allowing a path to the plate, or where the defense can set up. The rule is not nearly as difficult as everyone tries to make it, the defense can be where ever they want to be, but, they may not impede the runner without possession of the ball. If the runner never shows any sign of being impeded by the fielders location, then it is not obstruction.

When she slides into home, she slides into the catcher, as there is no lane to the plate available at all. Is that not being impeded? Sincere question.

 

[Comp]

does this mean the runner must initiate some form of contact in order for the obstruction to occur? thanks

Contact is not required, but the runner must be impeded in some way prior to the defensive player having the ball. Slowing down, changing course, pulling up etc. The runner in the play posted never showed any sign of being impeded prior to the catcher having the ball.

When she slides into home, she slides into the catcher, as there is no lane to the plate available at all. Is that not being impeded?

The catcher has the ball when contact is made, completely legal. Catcher does not have to give access to the plate once they have the ball. And as stated above, unless the runner is impeded in some way prior to the catcher having possession it is nothing.

 

[Il softball fan]

I'm with Comp on this one. Blown call. Runner is out at home. Catcher is in process of catching ball, and has possession of the ball before the runner gets there. Once in possession of the ball, you do not have to allow access to the plate, or bag.

 

[ScottyDont]

The catcher has the ball when contact is made, completely legal. Catcher does not have to give access to the plate once they have the ball. And as stated above, unless the runner is impeded in some way prior to the catcher having possession it is nothing.

So in order to make this an obstruction call, the runner would just have to change her path on her way to the plate?

 

[quincy]

We do not have much grief in DD's games, if we do it will be this play. Not always at home, sometimes at 2nd or 3rd.

I am not sure how this was obstruction but am listening to the posters that say it was.

(Agree with previous post that if you are getting your rule knowledge from the commentators you are doomed.)

 

[Comp]

So in order to make this an obstruction call, the runner would just have to change her path on her way to the plate?

Alter her path, slow down, stop, reverse course, make contact with catcher prior to possession of the ball etc but within reason. If the runner had just rounded 3rd and catcher is standing in front of plate and runner stops not a chance that is obstruction with the runner still 60' away.

 

[djcarter1966]

Alter her path, slow down, stop, reverse course, make contact with catcher prior to possession of the ball etc but within reason. If the runner had just rounded 3rd and catcher is standing in front of plate and runner stops not a chance that is obstruction with the runner still 60' away.

Which was the point of posting the stills...again it is harder in real time but the stills don't lie. As she rounds third the catcher is in front of the plate but it does not matter because there is nothing to impede yet.

When it matters say 5 or 6 steps from the plate the ball is bouncing just beside the pitching circle and the catcher is positioning herself to catch the thrown ball deep as she should since its perfectly on line