Jump to content

pitcher and batter collide on 1st base line

BalkHawk

By BalkHawk
in Collegiate

 Share
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 4157 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

  • Replies 199
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

maven
maven

What the fielder is thinking is immaterial to the call. The fielder has the right to an unmolested opportunity to field the ball, and this runner denied him that right.   Fielders can lose that righ

Dash Riprock
Dash Riprock

It doesn't matter what the fielder is 'trying' to do.  If the batted ball is within a step and a reach of the fielder, he is, by definition, in the act of fielding it.

zm1283
zm1283

The runner's lane protects the fielder taking a throw at first base, not a fielder making a play on a batted ball. The B/R is still responsible for avoiding the fielder while he is making a play, but

Posted Images

Richvee

Richvee

Posted
Posted

INT. Fielder was in the act of fielding the ball.

Well....he missed once...but still within a step and a reach for sure. 

johnnyg08

johnnyg08

Posted
Posted

Interference.

I found an AR in the Obstruction rule on page 31 2-54-AR2 states: When a fielder has made an attempt to field a batted ball and the ball is "within a step and a reach" the fielder is still considered "in the act"

Interference Rule: 2-50 AR 3

A.R. 3 - If a fielder has a chance to field a batted ball, but misplays it and while attempting to recover it, the ball is in the fielder's immediate reach and the fielder is contacted by the base runner attempting to reach a base, interference shall be called.

  • Like 1
johnnyg08

johnnyg08

Posted
Posted

Fielder had his chance to field the ball.  I got nothing.

There's no rule support for that assertion. If the fielder is chasing the ball after his initial attempt then he loses protection.

Would you have obstruction if you don't have interference?

bleacher_bum

bleacher_bum

Posted
Posted

Yes.  He was not fielding, he was applying a tag (with an empty glove.)  Happens quick, and he was within a step for sure, but appears to me, he's done fielding, and is starting the tag.

mjr_2013

mjr_2013

Posted
Posted

I'm not sure... I'm kind of with @bleacher_bum 's original thoughts... If he is re-fielding the ball, I'm absolutely with you all. But it looks to me like he is done fielding the ball after the first attempt. He then comes up to (presumably) apply a tag, and freezes in the baseline as contact was made.

 

Johnny, with your AR quote, it says "and while attempting to recover"... I'm not sure I see that here.

Replacematt

Replacematt

Posted
Posted

I'm not sure... I'm kind of with @bleacher_bum 's original thoughts... If he is re-fielding the ball, I'm absolutely with you all. But it looks to me like he is done fielding the ball after the first attempt. He then comes up to (presumably) apply a tag, and freezes in the baseline as contact was made.

 

Johnny, with your AR quote, it says "and while attempting to recover"... I'm not sure I see that here.

 

I think the opportunity to attempt to recover has to be protected. Otherwise we have INT on the initial fielding attempt, OBS in that split-second where he attempts to tag without the ball, and back to INT once he starts his second attempt.

  • Like 1
johnnyg08

johnnyg08

Posted
Posted

When I first looked at it, I had obstruction.

But, when I looked in the definitions again, I changed my mind quickly.

The ball was still within a step and a reach, I think the least SH*#ty end of the stick is Interference.

But I can certainly see a case for obstruction. (even though I'd be likely to judge interference here) I think the batter runner could've changed his path to avoid contact too.

Here's a situation where you get to use your game management skills we've all been practicing. Lots of room for judgment in this play. I think the best rule support is in Interference though.

mjr_2013

mjr_2013

Posted
Posted

 

I'm not sure... I'm kind of with @bleacher_bum 's original thoughts... If he is re-fielding the ball, I'm absolutely with you all. But it looks to me like he is done fielding the ball after the first attempt. He then comes up to (presumably) apply a tag, and freezes in the baseline as contact was made.

 

Johnny, with your AR quote, it says "and while attempting to recover"... I'm not sure I see that here.

 

I think the opportunity to attempt to recover has to be protected. Otherwise we have INT on the initial fielding attempt, OBS in that split-second where he attempts to tag without the ball, and back to INT once he starts his second attempt.

 

Fair enough.

 

I think to say he froze as a result of the impending contact and he wasn't given the chance to recover is grounds to call INT... I'm Monday Morning QBing this for sure though, as bleacher said, live I'd probably have obstruction that becomes nothing when he gets first.

 

Do all codes agree?

BalkHawk

BalkHawk

Posted
  • Author
Posted

FYI, the 4 S.E.C. umpires got together and decided the runner was safe. Also, f3 and b/r had a shoving match which led to their both being ejected, and cleared both dugouts.

  • Like 1
Richvee

Richvee

Posted
Posted

Sorry, I've got INT all day long and I'm not so sure I don't have MC as well. Note the clip is in slow motion. AT normal speed it would be hard for the runner to even know if F1 fielded the ball or not. He ran a direct line right into him while fielding the ball...rather violently I might add. 

johnnyg08

johnnyg08

Posted
Posted

FYI, the 4 S.E.C. umpires got together and decided "that's nothing. " Also, f3 and b/r had a shoving match which led to their both being ejected, and cleared both dugouts.

I guess I don't see how it could be "nothing" but I'm not an SEC umpire.

  • Like 1
Replacematt

Replacematt

Posted
Posted

 

FYI, the 4 S.E.C. umpires got together and decided "that's nothing. " Also, f3 and b/r had a shoving match which led to their both being ejected, and cleared both dugouts.

I guess I don't see how it could be "nothing" but I'm not an SEC umpire.

 

 

I'm just going to say they blew it. It's a batted ball--a collision between a runner and fielder on a batted ball is always something.

  • Like 2
LRZ

LRZ

Posted
Posted

Sorry, I've got INT all day long and I'm not so sure I don't have MC as well. Note the clip is in slow motion. AT normal speed it would be hard for the runner to even know if F1 fielded the ball or not. He ran a direct line right into him while fielding the ball...rather violently I might add.

The runner also veered inside the lane to make the contact.
  • Like 3
DVA7130

DVA7130

Posted
Posted

Watched this live. I will say great call. F1 was no longer fielding the ball, B1 from I saw didn't do anything, malicious (even though he ended up knocking two players over). Obstruction.

At least if it was in any game I am working under OBR. (I am not familiar with NCAA)

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...