Obstruction without contact?

[hill2933]

R1 gets picked off first and gets caught in run down. I rotate up to 1st and have good angle down basepath. After a couple throws R1 is attempting to make it back to 1st and F3 after making throw is in the path. R1 turns and runs past F3 without making contact although he does have to make a slight step to get around F3. R1 gets tagged out easily at 1st. Coach comes out wanting obstruction. I clearly had no contact and told him I had no obstruction.

 

Would you call obstruction if there is no contact? If so how much would it have to affect runner? I think if he would have had to stop or even slow down I may have given it to him but didn't have that here. Just been second guessing myself.

[maven]

Contact is not required for OBS. A fielder without the ball has no right to be between a runner and a base. Since you judged that the runner had to deviate to go around a fielder without the ball, the ruling should have been OBS. FED (all OBS) and OBR (Type A), he should have been awarded 2B.

[UmpJM]

hill,

 

Contact is not needed for obstruction.

 

If the fielder has to slow down or alter his path to his disadvantage because a fielder (without the ball, or, in NCAA & OBR, not "in the act of fielding") is in his way, obstruction is properly called.

 

Since he was in a rundown, he gets awarded 2B, regardless of rule code.

 

JM

[HeadHunterLA]

Concur for sure.

[JHSump]

I concur with both responses above.

 

Contact is not necessary.  OBR, Rule 2.00: "OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and

not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner."  Was the runner impeded?  That's your judgement.

[hill2933]

Thanks looking back I probably would have changed it. It was a very slight step but it was difinatley there.

[sdix00]

Here is a fun clip that illustrates outstanding mechanics when ruling Type B OBS. 

 

But it is also possible there is no contact in this clip, and it is still ruled OBS correctly.   Notice, just a slight adjustment to the runners path is enough to trigger the call.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=8725303

[JHSump]

Here is a fun clip that illustrates outstanding mechanics when ruling Type B OBS. 

 

But it is also possible there is no contact in this clip, and it is still ruled OBS correctly.   Notice, just a slight adjustment to the runners path is enough to trigger the call.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=8725303

Excellent video.  Excellent example.  (And excellent example of announces being off the mark.)

[maven]

That's helpful: the hindrance there wasn't even deviation, just slowed him down a fraction. Good call.

[Richvee]

 

Here is a fun clip that illustrates outstanding mechanics when ruling Type B OBS. 

 

But it is also possible there is no contact in this clip, and it is still ruled OBS correctly.   Notice, just a slight adjustment to the runners path is enough to trigger the call.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=8725303

Excellent video.  Excellent example.  (And excellent example of announces being off the mark.)

 

i'm looking for the line in the rules book that says 'If the fielder does everything he can to get out of the way it's not OBS. 

[hill2933]

Thanks great example! Don't feel like I will miss that one again.

[Dannytheman]

That video is a great example of Obstruction without contact. Thanks for posting it. The announcers need to go back to baseball 101 class.

[Mike Prince]

That video is a great example of Obstruction without contact. Thanks for posting it. The announcers need to go back to baseball 101 class.

 

You're making an assumption that they ever went!

[noumpere]

That's helpful: the hindrance there wasn't even deviation, just slowed him down a fraction. Good call.

I will point out that in MLB this was Type B, if the ball had not been thrown yet, and the umpire still could have called the runner out if he judged the runner was slowed by less than the amount he was out.

[umpire_scott]

 

That's helpful: the hindrance there wasn't even deviation, just slowed him down a fraction. Good call.

I will point out that in MLB this was Type B, if the ball had not been thrown yet, and the umpire still could have called the runner out if he judged the runner was slowed by less than the amount he was out.

 

 

This is the point that needs to be made in this.  If you noticed the umpire signaled OBS immediately.  Which the runner seemed to notice.  So if the throw then beat him by 2-3 steps does the umpire have the leeway to then waive his OBS call?  I was under the impression that once it's called it's called and the runner is protected to the next base.  As a player I was coached to always continue if I saw the OBS signal or verbal.  I do realize that OBR is different than FED.  So if you were that 3B umpire and you signaled OBS like that and then the throw beat the runner easily would you then waive off your OBS?

[BigUmpire]

Here is a fun clip that illustrates outstanding mechanics when ruling Type B OBS.  But it is also possible there is no contact in this clip, and it is still ruled OBS correctly.   Notice, just a slight adjustment to the runners path is enough to trigger the call. http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=8725303

Perfect example

[mstaylor]

Yes, if the runner tries to go further he can overrun his protection. Think of obstruction as a time/distance equation. You judge the amount of time he was delayed and then decide how far the runner was when he got tagged. If the obstruction cost him three steps and he is out by five, he's out. A very good example was Tijada getting obstructed going around third, the U3 announced obstruction. Tijada figured he had a free pass to the plate and backed off almost to a slow jog, got hosed at the plate and he stayed out. This was in a play-off game when he was on his pre-Orioles team. 

[noumpere]

 

 

That's helpful: the hindrance there wasn't even deviation, just slowed him down a fraction. Good call.

I will point out that in MLB this was Type B, if the ball had not been thrown yet, and the umpire still could have called the runner out if he judged the runner was slowed by less than the amount he was out.

 

 

This is the point that needs to be made in this.  If you noticed the umpire signaled OBS immediately.  Which the runner seemed to notice.  So if the throw then beat him by 2-3 steps does the umpire have the leeway to then waive his OBS call?  I was under the impression that once it's called it's called and the runner is protected to the next base.  As a player I was coached to always continue if I saw the OBS signal or verbal.  I do realize that OBR is different than FED.  So if you were that 3B umpire and you signaled OBS like that and then the throw beat the runner easily would you then waive off your OBS?

 

You are wrong in your impression that the runner is automatically protected to the next base in Type B OBS so yes the umpire can "waive his OBS call" (even if that really isn't the correct wording imo).

 

There was a play in the MLB playoffs a few years ago where the runner was obstructed rounding third, slowed down, was thrown out because of that and the out stood.  Correct call then and correct call now.

[maven]

You are wrong in your impression that the runner is automatically protected to the next base in Type B OBS so yes the umpire can "waive his OBS call" (even if that really isn't the correct wording imo).

 

There was a play in the MLB playoffs a few years ago where the runner was obstructed rounding third, slowed down, was thrown out because of that and the out stood.  Correct call then and correct call now.

I'm curious about that enforcement and am not familiar with the principle you're using. I would need to see an example to comment further, but I don't understand what "protecting a runner to a base" comes to if he's still liable to be put out.

 

And I don't mean (because you don't seem to mean) cases where, for example, a runner is protected to 3B but advances home and is put out there. I mean a case where a runner is protected to HP but is put out there and that out stands because the runner slowed down as he approached the awarded base. Never heard of that before.

[noumpere]

 

You are wrong in your impression that the runner is automatically protected to the next base in Type B OBS so yes the umpire can "waive his OBS call" (even if that really isn't the correct wording imo).

 

There was a play in the MLB playoffs a few years ago where the runner was obstructed rounding third, slowed down, was thrown out because of that and the out stood.  Correct call then and correct call now.

I'm curious about that enforcement and am not familiar with the principle you're using. I would need to see an example to comment further, but I don't understand what "protecting a runner to a base" comes to if he's still liable to be put out.

 

And I don't mean (because you don't seem to mean) cases where, for example, a runner is protected to 3B but advances home and is put out there. I mean a case where a runner is protected to HP but is put out there and that out stands because the runner slowed down as he approached the awarded base. Never heard of that before.

 

If a runner is "protected to a base" then I agree with you but just because a runner is OBS doesn't mean he's protected.

 

So, OBR.  No runners.  Batter hits a high fly to short left.  F6, F7, F8 all converge.  BR rounds first, bumps into F3 (umpire calls OBS) as the ball drops but is fielded by F7 on one hop.  BR continues to second and is thrown out by 45 feet. 

 

In OBR the out would stand.  In FED, the runner would be awarded second.

[Mike Prince]

 

 

You are wrong in your impression that the runner is automatically protected to the next base in Type B OBS so yes the umpire can "waive his OBS call" (even if that really isn't the correct wording imo).

 

There was a play in the MLB playoffs a few years ago where the runner was obstructed rounding third, slowed down, was thrown out because of that and the out stood.  Correct call then and correct call now.

I'm curious about that enforcement and am not familiar with the principle you're using. I would need to see an example to comment further, but I don't understand what "protecting a runner to a base" comes to if he's still liable to be put out.

 

And I don't mean (because you don't seem to mean) cases where, for example, a runner is protected to 3B but advances home and is put out there. I mean a case where a runner is protected to HP but is put out there and that out stands because the runner slowed down as he approached the awarded base. Never heard of that before.

 

If a runner is "protected to a base" then I agree with you but just because a runner is OBS doesn't mean he's protected.

 

So, OBR.  No runners.  Batter hits a high fly to short left.  F6, F7, F8 all converge.  BR rounds first, bumps into F3 (umpire calls OBS) as the ball drops but is fielded by F7 on one hop.  BR continues to second and is thrown out by 45 feet. 

 

In OBR the out would stand.  In FED, the runner would be awarded second.

 

 

In OBR, what if the runner in question got into a run-down between 1B and 2B (since he's out by 45 feet at 2B) and was tagged out returning to 1B?

[noumpere]

The runner is out even if he gets in a rundown.

[benjix4]

Another obstruction example.  Runner on third B1 turns to bunt catcher interferes with bunt attempt it goes fair anyway and R3 notices the catcher out in front of the plate with the ball and turns back to 3rd.  B1 thrown out at first.  Call was delayed dead ball catchers interference.  In high school coach elects the result of the play or batter to 1st.  Obvoiusly he wants batter to first but asks "what about my runner attempting to score, we had a squeeze on and he only turned around when he saw the catcher jump out front and interfere.  What say you out there...

[noumpere]

Another obstruction example.  Runner on third B1 turns to bunt catcher interferes with bunt attempt it goes fair anyway and R3 notices the catcher out in front of the plate with the ball and turns back to 3rd.  B1 thrown out at first.  Call was delayed dead ball catchers interference.  In high school coach elects the result of the play or batter to 1st.  Obvoiusly he wants batter to first but asks "what about my runner attempting to score, we had a squeeze on and he only turned around when he saw the catcher jump out front and interfere.  What say you out there...

If he was stealing on the pitch (aka suicide squeeze) he gets home other wise he doesn't.  You have to decide.  Since he had time to turn around probably not.