F3 Obstruction or Not?

[Mudder]

OBR, I'm BU, R1 none out, batter hits grounder to left side, throw is early but off line taking F3 up the first base line in fair territory and high, F3 jumps up makes the catch lands maybe 2 or 3 feet before 1B and just in fair territory, before B/R is reaches him, then F3 sticks his foot out (in an apparent attempt to step on the bag he argued) and trips B/R who goes tumbling down past 1B, misses the bag, then F3 tags him while BR is lying on the ground.  I called OBS and left B/R at 1B.  

Defensive coach objects says " he did not intentionally trip the runner, he was simply looking for the base with his foot, plus he has the ball and can do whatever he wants".

Was this OBS?

[maven]

1 hour ago, Mudder said:

Defensive coach objects says " he did not intentionally trip the runner, he was simply looking for the base with his foot...

This part, if correct, would exonerate F3 and make a no-call correct.

1 hour ago, Mudder said:

... plus he has the ball and can do whatever he wants".

This part is wrong, as possession of the ball does not excuse intentional hindrance.

The correctness of the call turns on your judgment of F3's intent, which we can't help much with unless you have video.

[Stk004]

So what's the proper call and mechanic for a fielder intentionally tripping a runner while in possession of the ball. I'd have a hard time calling obstruction given the definition. 

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.

[noumpere]

1 minute ago, Stk004 said:

So what's the proper call and mechanic for a fielder intentionally tripping a runner while in possession of the ball. I'd have a hard time calling obstruction given the definition. 

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.

It's still OBS.  And maybe UNS.

 

(Just like whatever the kerfuffle was yesterday about "proving" that a nicked pitch can't be caught for a foul out, the rule book doesn't always say exactly what it means or mean exactly what it says.)

[stkjock]

@noumpere UNS?  it's not on the acronyms page

[Stk004]

14 minutes ago, stkjock said:

@noumpere UNS?  it's not on the acronyms page

I'm assuming he means "unsportsmanlike" 

[LRZ]

40 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

So what's the proper call and mechanic for a fielder intentionally tripping a runner while in possession of the ball. I'd have a hard time calling obstruction given the definition. 

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.

Several local leagues play OBR with Fed modifications, including a malicious contact rule. An intentional trip could be MC. Wasn't there a Fed POE that said an unnecessarily forceful tag was MC? I.e., was the contact intentional and excessive?

[Stk004]

1 minute ago, LRZ said:

Several local leagues play OBR with Fed modifications, including a malicious contact rule. An intentional trip would probably be MC. Wasn't there a Fed POE that said an unnecessarily forceful tag was MC? I.e., was the contact intentional and excessive?

Doesn't MC require intent to injure?

[Mudder]

1 hour ago, maven said:

This part, if correct, would exonerate F3 and make a no-call correct.

This part is wrong, as possession of the ball does not excuse intentional hindrance.

The correctness of the call turns on your judgment of F3's intent, which we can't help much with unless you have video.

I guess by the strict letter of the rule, if I judged it was unintentional, and I don't call OBS how on earth do I sell this to an offensive coach who just witnessed his player tripped, and face planted into the ground, and now he's out to boot!  I know its a HTBT, but it was a pretty blatant trip

[LRZ]

8 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

Doesn't MC require intent to injure?

Intent is a judgment, and if a hard tag is MC, F3's intentional trip could likewise be excessive and construed as the intent to injure.

Or call it unsportsmanlike, "behavior in any manner not in accordance with the spirit of fair play."

[maven]

1 hour ago, Mudder said:

I guess by the strict letter of the rule, if I judged it was unintentional, and I don't call OBS how on earth do I sell this to an offensive coach who just witnessed his player tripped, and face planted into the ground, and now he's out to boot!  I know its a HTBT, but it was a pretty blatant trip

If it's a blatant trip, call OBS.

If it's not an intentional trip, call nothing. "Coach, in my judgment the fielder was not trying to trip the runner. Since he had the ball, he's not guilty of obstructing your runner, and the out stands."

I'm not saying coach will like that explanation, nor that he'll agree with your judgment. But if you state it clearly, there's nothing to argue about. He disagrees? OK, let's play ball.