What's your call?

[umpire20]

What's your call on this play?

[maineump]

I've got an out and probably an ejection. There was no attempt to avoid, the catcher was OK in his positioning.  The runner dropped his outside shoulder into the catcher so you could have MC if you wanted to push it. In HS and above I have an out and ejection.

If this is a LL tournament game, then these are suppose to be all-stars, this was intentional and not a train wreck - ejection. He won't forget the 1+1 penalty.

Then when the coach and kid come to argue, I think the ump did a good job getting the kid out of there.

As far as the umpire, it appears he has line responsibility, he needs to be on the line. He moved back OK, but was on the move making the call - need to be still for that.

[KenBAZ]

Do you think he was too quick with the out call? You don't see the ball in F2's glove until well after his out mechanic. I see R3 moving inside to avoid the tag and F2 falling back into him. Could be judged interference, but I have nothing malicious. Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[JaxRolo]

I've got an out and probably an ejection. There was no attempt to avoid, the catcher was OK in his positioning.  The runner dropped his outside shoulder into the catcher so you could have MC if you wanted to push it. In HS and above I have an out and ejection.

If this is a LL tournament game, then these are suppose to be all-stars, this was intentional and not a train wreck - ejection. He won't forget the 1+1 penalty.

Then when the coach and kid come to argue, I think the ump did a good job getting the kid out of there.

As far as the umpire, it appears he has line responsibility, he needs to be on the line. He moved back OK, but was on the move making the call - need to be still for that.

I see no ejection here. F2 is way up the line. Might be a case of CI especially in FED.

[JaxRolo]

PU's positioning could have been much better.

 

[Replacematt]

I see no ejection here. F2 is way up the line. Might be a case of CI especially in FED.

CI? No ejection? WTF?

[umpire20]

When I first watched this, I saw R3 put his shoulder down right as he was about to meet the catcher, so I would have called him out for interference (malicious contact) and then ejected him. Having the luxury to look at this again, I see the runner with his head down most of the way and then realizing he was heading for the catcher. It might not have been malicious after seeing it again, but bottom line is that you can't put your shoulder down. Without the luxury of seeing the whole play again, I would have ejected him.  

[Aging_Arbiter]

It looked to me more like he was turning.  Again, the advantage of slo-mo instant replay.  Watch the runners hips.  He turns his shoulders and steps over with his right leg which could be construed as an attempt to avoid.

[maineump]

I see no ejection here. F2 is way up the line. Might be a case of CI especially in FED.

I don't have CI here, because the catcher is inside and it appears he had to move up to make the catch. I realize that OBS does not have to be intentional, but I just don't have it here. The ball and runner are there at the same I don't believe the runner had a clue where the ball was, and the catcher had no idea where the runner was - could be just a trainwreck, but remember this call has to be made without replay. Players actions and reactions have to be looked at in the 1/2 second you have here.

Two issues - 1. Left handed catcher makes it look odd, maybe no collision with a right handed catcher, just hit the glove arm. 2. An older catcher probably (hopefully) would have stayed back on the play in front of the plate.

I still have the runner, running inside and making contact - I was always taught to slide outside and reach for the plate. I feel the ejection could go either way (I opt to keep them in the game unless 100% convinced it is MC).

I love how the coaches (both) were at the plate before the catcher got up - I little too quick for my taste.

[maineump]

Do you think he was too quick with the out call? You don't see the ball in F2's glove until well after his out mechanic. I see R3 moving inside to avoid the tag and F2 falling back into him. Could be judged interference, but I have nothing malicious. Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Could the quick out call be - PU called int and called the out regardless? It does seem quick to me, he should wait until the play stops and the catcher comes up with the ball.

[JaxRolo]

I don't have CI here, because the catcher is inside and it appears he had to move up to make the catch. I realize that OBS does not have to be intentional, but I just don't have it here. The ball and runner are there at the same I don't believe the runner had a clue where the ball was, and the catcher had no idea where the runner was - could be just a trainwreck, but remember this call has to be made without replay. Players actions and reactions have to be looked at in the 1/2 second you have here.

Two issues - 1. Left handed catcher makes it look odd, maybe no collision with a right handed catcher, just hit the glove arm. 2. An older catcher probably (hopefully) would have stayed back on the play in front of the plate.

I still have the runner, running inside and making contact - I was always taught to slide outside and reach for the plate. I feel the ejection could go either way (I opt to keep them in the game unless 100% convinced it is MC).

I love how the coaches (both) were at the plate before the catcher got up - I little too quick for my taste.

Not a trainwreck in FED. He just can't block the path. Period.

[Kevin_K]

With the benefit of slo-mo and multiple views.......

@JaxRolo ,,,,F2 is in possession of the ball a full stride before R3 makes contact.... where is the obstruction?

:09 in the video shows an awkward backhanded catch by F2 followed by what appears to be a trainwreck as R3 realizes he is going to collide with F2.

[stevis]

It can't be an out for failure to slide or avoid contact in LL--catcher wasn't waiting with the ball.

I've just got the tag out and a trainwreck.

[Rich Ives]

The shoulder drops as a result of the collision. It doesn't start before it. No way it's intentional.

The catcher is guilty of obstruction in LL rules and this is a LL game.

Time! You - Home.

BTW, the LL rule is slide or attempt to get around a fielder who has the ball and is waiting to make the tag. It does NOT say "avoid contact.". Get that thought out of your head. Make it a New Year's resolution. 

[stkjock]

 

The catcher is guilty of obstruction in LL rules and this is a LL game.

Rich - can you elaborate on this please.

 

Rule 7.06 (b) Note 2 - says the fielder "blocks the base or base line"  in this case, the catcher is clearly inside the line leaving a path for the runner.  Or you grab OBS because the runner chose his path to the inside of the line???

 

 

Edited December 31, 2015 by stkjock

[Rich Ives]

Rich - can you elaborate on this please.

 

Rule 7.06 (b) Note 2 - says the fielder "blocks the base or base line"  in this case, the catcher is clearly inside the line leaving a path for the runner.  Or you grab OBS because the runner chose his path to the inside of the line???

 

 

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

[Richvee]

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).

[Rich Ives]

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).

The runner was hindered before the catcher got the ball. It doesn't matter where the fielder is. If the runner is hindered it's obstruction.

The fielder did NOT have the ball waiting to make the tag so that rule doesn't come into play. There's no such thing in LL as "out for illegal contact". You do NOT have to avoid contact, only attempt to get around a fielder who has the ball AND is waiting to make the tag. "Avoid contact" is nowhere to be found in LL rules.

[ricka56]

Its just a nutcutter. Be able to articulate the appropriate rule to match your best judgment call. 

[maven]

Runners earn the OBS call when a fielder without the ball forces them to go around.

They lose the call when they fail to (try to) go around.

[Rich Ives]

Runners earn the OBS call when a fielder without the ball forces them to go around.

They lose the call when they fail to (try to) go around.

That makes no sense whatsoever.  If they have to try they have thus been obstructed. The fielder has to not obstruct. Period. Don't lay it on the runner.

[kylejt]

Watching this one time, only at full speed, I could make a case for OBS, INT or a trainwreck safe/out, and I'm confident I could sell it. It was that close. If a manager asked nicely, I'd be more than happy to go to my BU, to ask what he saw.

 

Now in slo-mo, I see the throw taking F2 in the basepath, thus negating OBS. I see the ball reaching F2 just an instant before R3 reacts to F2's positioning. I don't see F2 waiting to make a tag, though, and that's key in my final judgement. Now the kicker: Did F2's mitt actually contact R3? IMO, THAT'S what the PU really needed to sell. Wait, point, call it.

Edited January 1, 2016 by kylejt

[basejester]

2.0 . . .

OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, 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, base line or home plate
from a base runner while not in possession of the ball.

7.06 -- When the obstruction occurs the umpire shall call or signal “Obstruction.”
(a) If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batter-runner is obstructed before touching first base, the ball is dead
and all runners shall advance without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire's judgment, if
there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base last legally touched
by such runner, before the obstruction. Any preceding runners forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for
obstruction shall advance without liability to be put out.

(b) If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall
then call "Time" and impose such penalties, if any, as in that umpire's judgment will nullify the act of obstruction. NOTE (1): When the
ball is not dead on obstruction and an obstructed runner advances beyond the base which, in the umpire’s judgment, the runner would
have been awarded because of being obstructed, the runner does so at his/her own risk and may be tagged out. This is a judgment call.
NOTE (2): If the defensive player blocks the base (plate) or base line clearly without possession of the ball, obstruction shall be called.
The runner is safe and a delayed dead ball shall be called.

 

INSTRUCTOR COMMENTS:

• It is quite simple now for the umpires to rule on obstruction...if the defense does not have the ball and impedes the progress of any runner it shall be called obstruction. It makes no difference if the defense is fielding a thrown ball or waiting for the ball, if the defensive player does not have the ball in his/her possession it is obstruction if they impede the progress of any runner.
• Train wrecks are still going to happen and are not to be considered as obstruction. Example: Throw from the shortstop to the 1st baseman in an attempt to get a batter-runner out pulls the 1 st baseman down the line toward home plate and the 1 st baseman and the batter-runner collide. This is a train wreck because the defensive player is doing what he/she should be doing (fielding the ball) and the batter-runner is doing what he/she should be doing (running the bases).
• Most actions related to obstruction concern who has the right-of-way. The defense has the right to the baseline on a batted ball or when he/she already has the ball in his/her possession. The offense has the right to the baseline in all other occasions, including on a thrown ball.
• A “fake tag” is a dangerous play and must not be allowed to continue. In addition to the calling of obstruction, the player and team should be warned. Further instances could result in ejection.
• There is a difference between a “decoy” and a “fake tag.” A decoy results in confusing the base runner who is not watching his/her base coaches.  A fake tag results in the player sliding when he/she doesn’t have to slide.

 

Edited January 1, 2016 by basejester

[Richvee]

The runner was hindered before the catcher got the ball. It doesn't matter where the fielder is. If the runner is hindered it's obstruction.

The fielder did NOT have the ball waiting to make the tag so that rule doesn't come into play. There's no such thing in LL as "out for illegal contact". You do NOT have to avoid contact, only attempt to get around a fielder who has the ball AND is waiting to make the tag. "Avoid contact" is nowhere to be found in LL rules.

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? 

Edited January 1, 2016 by Richvee

[basejester]

Now in slo-mo, I see the throw taking

F2

in the basepath, thus negating

OBS

.

 

I see the ball reaching F2 just an instant before R3 reacts to F2's positioning.

OBR:

OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in posses-
sion of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the
progress of any runner.

Note that OBR has the phrase "and not in the act of fielding the ball" but Little League conspicuously does not.  So, I don't think it matters in Little League that the throw takes F2 into the basepath.  Your second statement, however, IMHO, does.