FED OBS/MC rule

[mwest5575]

I'm reviewing my OBS/INT/MC rules getting ready for the high school season here in NC. I came across this video and read through some of the comments. I'd like some help from the group. Here is the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q56xpFCGErw

FED rules. So I saw this as OBS on the catcher for blocking a path to the plate without the ball. It is my understanding that, unlike NCAA, there is obstruction even if the catcher is in the act of fielding the throw. He still has to leave a path to the plate. HOWEVER, to me this appears to be malicious contact by the runner, who had time to avoid the contact or slide, but instead ran straight through the catcher who was trying to field the throw. In high school don't we protect the catcher here and call MC/Interference on the runner, call him out and eject him?

I'd appreciate the group's insight.

[Mike D]

I'm reviewing my OBS/INT/MC rules getting ready for the high school season here in NC. I came across this video and read through some of the comments. I'd like some help from the group. Here is the video:

FED rules. So I saw this as OBS on the catcher for blocking a path to the plate without the ball. It is my understanding that, unlike NCAA, there is obstruction even if the catcher is in the act of fielding the throw. He still has to leave a path to the plate. HOWEVER, to me this appears to be malicious contact by the runner, who had time to avoid the contact or slide, but instead ran straight through the catcher who was trying to field the throw. In high school don't we protect the catcher here and call MC/Interference on the runner, call him out and eject him?
I'd appreciate the group's insight.

You are correct, in FED the catcher has to have the ball in order to block the plate.
In watching the video IMO the catcher was moving to catch the ball which took ghim into the runners path (OBS). It didn't look like the runner had time to avoid the catcher and was bracing himself, and I didn't see malicious contact. I most likely would have deemed this incidental contact.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[mwest5575]

Upon watching it again on a larger screen it does look more like the catcher lunged or moved into the runners path later than I first thought so I can see the incidental contact. The umpire ruled out here and for all I know they may have been using OBR so that would be correct. But in FED we would score the run for OBS an rule incendental contact. I can see that. 

[maven]

This clip is part of a training tape I made for teaching OBS at my association.

The OP has the rules correct: OBS in FED includes any fielder without the ball denying a runner access to a base, with no exception for being in the act of fielding the ball. Also, MC does by rule supersede OBS: where we have both, the penalty for OBS lapses, and we enforce only MC.

The OP also has part of the judgment call correct: I agree that the action in this video is OBS under FED (it is not for OBR/NCAA, which does have the exception).

I disagree that the action here is MC. The appearance that the runner had time to alter his path is created by the slow motion (slo-mo makes everything look illegal). F2 starts moving when the runner is at the dirt circle: a runner who is actually running has less than 1/10th of a second at that point till he makes contact, and that's not enough time.

In OBR/NCAA, this is a "trainwreck" (= no infraction); in FED, it's OBS. The contact is not incidental: it's illegal, and the fielder is guilty of OBS. Even if the runner is tagged before touching the plate, we'll award him HP.

[maven]

Here's another clip we use, one that demonstrates the vast superiority of 3BLX.

 

[mwest5575]

Thanks maven. I agree the slow motion threw me off but moreso the camera angle. A view from 3blx would have definitely made it easier to see. 

[jkumpire]

Like Maven I've used this play to teach OBS/INT/MC in new umpire's classes and local associations, and his call is exactly correct. OBS/trainwreck, no MC.