Blocking the base w/o the ball

[Tony B]

Under the new Fed guidelines how much of the base is going have to be blocked for you to call OBS?

I'm thinking 75% or more. I'm thinking these guys have been sliding into bases for a while to avoid tags and such this would be enough to still give the window of opportunity to reach the base.

[strike3scott]

From what I read in the NFHS Preseason Guide, they cannot block access to a base without the ball. I guess there is the problem. How much access do they have to grant to be sufficient?

I would say that in your judgment - a clean, safe slide into a base without altering the play is access. Anything that causes a player to alter his approach or force an unsafe situation would justify the call of obstruction.

[littleleagueump]

Sounds like you are talking about Obstruction.

In the Little League rule book, obstruction is the act of a fielder, while not in possession of the ball, impedes the progress of any runner. A fake tag is considered obstruction. (Note: Obstruction shall be called on a defensive player who blocks off a base, baseline or home plate from a base runner while not in possession of the ball)

[semperfiguy]

IT seems simple enough, if the player doesnt have the ball, then they cannot block the base. In the act of fielding the ball however they do have the right to set up for the throw if its in flight. Am I missing something here????

[mepperson]

I think the question is - what is your definition of "access to the base?", specifically - "how much of the base has to be open in order for the runner to have access to it?" This is something I haven't ever thought about in much detail, as it's usually pretty obvious when someone is blocking a base; I also don't call Fed, which leaves me out of the loop on what the new rules or guidelines are.

I agree with the 75% - but, which 75%?

[Bigdog]

Hey all,

The way I see it, if a fielder blocks ANY of the base without the ball, he is guilty of obstruction.

Bigdog:cool:

[mepperson]

Bigdog - I can see that, to an extent. However, the definition of Obstruction states that the field "impedes the progress of the runner." Depending on the line being taken by the runner to the base, part of the base can be "blocked" without impeding the progress of the runner. Even though it's a judgement call, I would use the analogy of a car parked on the side of a highway - even though the wheels may be outside of the line and in the roadway, but may not actually impede traffic in that lane. Granted, if there is a collision, the parked car was parked incorrectly; but, unless there's a collision, where's the obstruction?

(just debating, not arguing)

[LMSANS]

It's a judgement call. I don't agree that blocking any of the base is obstruction. If there is still access available, I'm probably not calling it. But if F3 has his knee down on a pick-off before the ball gets there - "That's Obstruction", R1 goes to 2nd.

I had a play today at a Frosh game, runner comes around 3rd and is going to arrive at the same time as the ball. The cather is blocking access to the front 17"- without the ball, the runner is clear on the 3rd base side and the point, he's got plenty of access.

Catcher made it easy for me and dropped the ball anyway.

[umpire08]

I think that this is very serious issue and by that I mean diffrent umpires call diffrently and each has his own style but if a player does something like blocking the bag and even faking a tag that is without a doubt obstruction because he stopped the progress of not only the runner but possibly the game by his actions and such a violation should be enforced no questions asked that is my feeling thank you umpire08