Obstruction, Fake Tag or Nothing?

[blue23ll]

I saw this on a video at our association meeting last night, and it sparked a bit of debate. 

 

FED baseball, Runner at 1st, outs are not important. The hit and run is on, runner breaks hard for 2b on the pitch. Fly ball is hit to CF, runner isn't watching the baseball nor did he apparently hear the ball hit the bat so he is running full bore to 2b. SS runs over to 2b and 'simulates' the start of a double play, runner slides into 2b, and realizes the ball was caught in CF and tries to get back to 1b. He is doubled off 1b. 

 

The call on the field was obstruction. What say you?

[Cav]

What did the video show that lead the group to believe F6 "simulated" the start of a DP?  2-22-2 says a fake tag "simulates a tag" but not a DP.

[blue23ll]

What did the video show that lead the group to believe F6 "simulated" the start of a DP?  2-22-2 says a fake tag "simulates a tag" but not a DP.

The F6 'looked' like he had the ball to his chest and he came across the bag 'simulating' the pivot on a double play. 

[VAUmp]

Good Question

[Jimurray]

Good Question

Good deke, legal.

[VAUmp]

I would probably say that it wasn't obstruction, because I'd have a hard time explaining to the coach that it was.  The book specifically states a "fake tag" is obstruction, not the situation you explained.

[ricka56]

In OBR, a tag is defined as touching the runner with the ball or touching the base with the ball.

 

But if Fed, there is no definition of a tag, but in 8-4-2j it appears the rules distinguish between the two (touch runner or touch base). A tag apparently does not include the touch of the base. So the OP would not be a fake tag.

[noumpere]

Not even close to OBS, as described, even under FED rules.  I think there might even be an interp on this.

[maven]

FED's definition of TAG is cleverly concealed in 2-24-4.

 

The case plays (8.3.2B, 8.3.2E) for fake tags specifically reference tagging the runner, not the base. They do not, however, explicitly rule out a fake tag of a base.

 

That said, this is a fake tag of a base, and it did hinder the runner (who slid instead of advancing to the next base due to having been deceived).

 

Might be nice to have some guidance on this one.

[ALStripes17]

FED's definition of TAG is cleverly concealed in 2-24-5.

The case plays (8.3.2B, 8.3.2E) for fake tags specifically reference tagging the runner, not the base. They do not, however, explicitly rule out a fake tag of a base.

That said, this is a fake tag of a base, and it did hinder the runner (who slid instead of advancing to the next base due to having been deceived).

Might be nice to have some guidance on this one.

Another wonderful loophole.

With that def'n of 'tag out' not including a base (I think it's 2-24-4), I would venture to say current rule book would not allow OBS in OP.

However, FED intent seems that it would want OBS.

My head hurts

[maven]

Not even close to OBS, as described, even under FED rules.  I think there might even be an interp on this.

 

I think it is close, and I'm not finding an interp in the last 15 years that addresses this issue.

 

I agree, on reflection, that the OP is not the fake tag that FED wants called. Partly that's an inference from the case plays (they could have included it if they wanted it called), and partly that's because the runner should have a little better awareness in this situation.

[johnnyg08]

For FED the fake tag provision is purely safety related.  If it causes the runner to be impeded, you can probably get OBS on this in FED.

 

In NCAA and OBR this is 100% legal.

[ricka56]

FED's definition of TAG is cleverly concealed in 2-24-4.

 

The case plays (8.3.2B, 8.3.2E) for fake tags specifically reference tagging the runner, not the base. They do not, however, explicitly rule out a fake tag of a base.

 

That said, this is a fake tag of a base, and it did hinder the runner (who slid instead of advancing to the next base due to having been deceived).

 

Might be nice to have some guidance on this one.

 

I stand corrected, a tag is defined in Fed. So what was Fed's intent for making a fake tag illegal. They are either trying to avoid possible injury or trying  to avoid what some might consider an unsportsmanlike situation (trick the runner) resulting in trouble brewing. Both of these possibilities would exist in a fake base tag sitch. So if I was taking a Fed test, I would say that this was illegal.

[johnnyg08]

 

FED's definition of TAG is cleverly concealed in 2-24-4.

 

The case plays (8.3.2B, 8.3.2E) for fake tags specifically reference tagging the runner, not the base. They do not, however, explicitly rule out a fake tag of a base.

 

That said, this is a fake tag of a base, and it did hinder the runner (who slid instead of advancing to the next base due to having been deceived).

 

Might be nice to have some guidance on this one.

 

I stand corrected, a tag is defined in Fed. So what was Fed's intent for making a fake tag illegal. They are either trying to avoid possible injury or trying  to avoid what some might consider an unsportsmanlike situation (trick the runner) resulting in trouble brewing. Both of these possibilities would exist in a fake base tag sitch. So if I was taking a Fed test, I would say that this was illegal.

 

 

100% safety related.  R1 gets deked, slides hard, but legally into F6 who now blew out his knee.  

[Cav]

Were there base coaches present in the video?

[Cav]

 

What did the video show that lead the group to believe F6 "simulated" the start of a DP?  2-22-2 says a fake tag "simulates a tag" but not a DP.

The F6 'looked' like he had the ball to his chest and he came across the bag 'simulating' the pivot on a double play. 

 

 

I'm pretty sure in NFHS games it's still legal for fielders to feint to 1B, just not in-contact pitchers.

 

(My apologies; I'm in a rainy-day funk.)

 

[ALStripes17]

What did the video show that lead the group to believe F6 "simulated" the start of a DP? 2-22-2 says a fake tag "simulates a tag" but not a DP.

The F6 'looked' like he had the ball to his chest and he came across the bag 'simulating' the pivot on a double play.

I'm pretty sure in NFHS games it's still legal for fielders to feint to 1B, just not in-contact pitchers.

(My apologies; I'm in a rainy-day funk.)

It's not the 'feint to 1B' by the F6 that is being discussed. It's the fake 'catch and tag' of 2B making the runner believe he was under the auspices of the Force Play Slide Rule

Ya know, because we give HS kids that much credit

[Jimurray]

FED's definition of TAG is cleverly concealed in 2-24-4.

 

The case plays (8.3.2B, 8.3.2E) for fake tags specifically reference tagging the runner, not the base. They do not, however, explicitly rule out a fake tag of a base.

 

That said, this is a fake tag of a base, and it did hinder the runner (who slid instead of advancing to the next base due to having been deceived).

 

Might be nice to have some guidance on this one.

So as long as he fakes gloving the ball and doesn't tag 2B or the runner we are ok. Seems we are getting tied up over a semantic issue.

[Cav]

 

 

 

What did the video show that lead the group to believe F6 "simulated" the start of a DP? 2-22-2 says a fake tag "simulates a tag" but not a DP.

The F6 'looked' like he had the ball to his chest and he came across the bag 'simulating' the pivot on a double play.

 

I'm pretty sure in NFHS games it's still legal for fielders to feint to 1B, just not in-contact pitchers.

(My apologies; I'm in a rainy-day funk.)

 

It's not the 'feint to 1B' by the F6 that is being discussed. It's the fake 'catch and tag' of 2B making the runner believe he was under the auspices of the Force Play Slide Rule

Ya know, because we give HS kids that much credit

 

 

OK, I'll dial it down.  I'm picturing F6 having joined both hands at his chest while coming [running, dragging a foot] across 2B as if he were the front end of a DP.  "That's nothing!" with or without a feint throw to 1B other than a learning opportunity for all concerned, including perhaps even me.  It is, after all is said and done, still Calvi, I mean, NFHS ball.  I sure hope I never see the day NFHS prohibits the use of bats which contribute so much to the inherently dangerous environment of a baseball game.  Sorry, my dial doesn't seem to be working very well in this drizzle.   

 

[maven]

So as long as he fakes gloving the ball and doesn't tag 2B or the runner we are ok. Seems we are getting tied up over a semantic issue.

Sure it's a semantic issue: we're trying to figure out what 'fake tag' means.

 

That doesn't mean it's not worth discussing. In fact, getting the call right in the OP hinges on it. Nothing could be more important for that call.

[noumpere]

 

Not even close to OBS, as described, even under FED rules.  I think there might even be an interp on this.

 

I think it is close, and I'm not finding an interp in the last 15 years that addresses this issue.

 

 

Me neither -- so where did I come up with it?  I still stand by no OBS.

[Jimurray]

 

So as long as he fakes gloving the ball and doesn't tag 2B or the runner we are ok. Seems we are getting tied up over a semantic issue.

Sure it's a semantic issue: we're trying to figure out what 'fake tag' means.

 

That doesn't mean it's not worth discussing. In fact, getting the call right in the OP hinges on it. Nothing could be more important for that call.

 

So if FED decides a touch of 2B is a tag, the fielder is guilty of a fake tag because he actually tagged the base? If he fakes touching the base it's not a fake tag because he didn't touch the base? Or both dekes will be illegal? 

[blue23ll]

Were there base coaches present in the video?

The coaches were present, 3b coach(HC) was into the field of play before time was requested or called. 

 

FED's definition of TAG is cleverly concealed in 2-24-4.

 

The case plays (8.3.2B, 8.3.2E) for fake tags specifically reference tagging the runner, not the base. They do not, however, explicitly rule out a fake tag of a base.

 

That said, this is a fake tag of a base, and it did hinder the runner (who slid instead of advancing to the next base due to having been deceived).

 

Might be nice to have some guidance on this one.

The umpires at the time, ruled it obstruction. There were no ejections as a result of this ruling. We went to our state commissioner who opined, " this is a 'cheesy', but totally legal decoy play".

[charliej47]

The last class I went to discussed the defense that does something to change interfer with a runner without having the ball would be construde as obstruction.  Using this as a judgement call, I have obstruction on this play.

[JHSump]

I had this occur today in a showcase tournament game, Fed rules. It happened on a single on the ground in the 3-4 hole with R1, I told F6 not to do that again. He said, quite calmly and with obvious curiosity, "But I thought only fake tags were not allowed." I told him the rules don't allow fake tags because they are unsafe, and the same holds for his fake start of a DP. I was stretching the truth a bit, perhaps.

And I figured I'd look on UE to see what folks were saying about this sort of thing. I'd like to see an official interpretation.