Jump to content

What's your call?


umpire20
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 3008 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

I believe that WP is still teaching that errant throws, taking the fielder into the path of the runner, precludes them from being guilty of OBS. I could be wrong on this, though.

 

We've got an outreach clinic in a couple of weeks, and I'll ask the WR gurus.

 

I know the :"act of fielding" was taking out several years ago, but the "throw taking the fielder into the path", I thought, was still valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read the whole rule including the definition in 2.00.  Hinder the runner when you don't have the ball = obstruction.

I understand the rule.  I just don't see the runner hindered before f2 has the ball and agree with Rich's comments.  

I've got to disagree with an OBS call here. The catcher has the ball before R3 gets to him. R3 wasn't hindered in his attempt to reach home by a fielder without the ball. Also, F2 is in fair territory and reaches over the foul line which means R3 had plenty room to get by F2 without contact. Running with your head down, unaware of where fielders are, is not an excuse for not trying to get around a fielder with the ball. I've got the runner out for illegal contact,( failure to slide or attempt to get around a fielder who has the ball).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said a million times that on calls like this you will not have the time to analyze every single detail including if it's a day game or if it's Tuesday. I see the catcher get the ball, obstruction is the least likely option. Tangled up before the plate and the ball isn't on the ground? There's got to be a tag somewhere in our blessed land of no replay. Last thing to decide is if it's malicious. Kids flip, gasps from the stands, you gotta umpire, go with what your gut tells you that second. I'm leaning train wreck. We have at most two seconds to process that before we look just as dumbfounded as the stands. Sell, and expect coaches to be on you instantly, but remember the ball is still live.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess we see this play differently. I can see your point that F2 wasn't "waiting to make a tag" so I could concede no illegal action byR3. But there's no way I see OBS. F2 had the ball before R3 gets there and in no way shape or form did F2 alter R3's path to the plate prior to having the ball. 

Again, I'll concede the runner did nothing illegal. But I'd just like to point out, when I said out for illegal contact, if a fielder is waiting to make a tag, and the runner does not attempt to slide or get around and plows the fielder, that would be "illegal contact", no? 

It would be an out for failure to slide or attempt to get around.  The words "illegal contact" are nowhere to be found.  Just call the out. If it seems unsportsmanlike conduct rather than just a wreck then eject for UC.  But PLEASE don't use the words "illegal contact". You'll just get challenged on "where does it say that" and you'll have to make up something because it isn't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the rule.  I just don't see the runner hindered before f2 has the ball and agree with Rich's comments.  

 

Richvee tried to excuse it by saying  " F2 is in fair territory and reaches over the foul line which means R3 had plenty room to get by F2 without contact." R3 would have had to alter his path.  Obstruction all day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'm seeing is the runner is not hindered before F2 has the ball.   It's bang-bang, however F2 has the ball in his glove before the runner makes contact.

 

I agree with Richvee that the runner had plenty of room to run past the catcher in foul territory.  If the runner has his head up, he could have avoided the tag, IMO.  However, I'm not looking to excuse it on that basis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

FWIW, I think it does matter that F2 is positioned in front of HP in fair territory. He had to be somewhere to field the throw, and he's where he's supposed to be, in front of the plate. He's not  standing on the plate, or on the foul line towards 3rd, and he sure as hell isn't required to look up the line and judge R3's path to the plate before deciding where to stand to try and field the throw. I've got no OBS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richvee

I'm not disagreeing with your reasoning.  I think that one doesn't even need to get that far.  My layman's $.02

I knew that. Sorry for those quotes on that post..not sure how they all got there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...