First Base Runner Fielder Interference

[Guest Rob]

Howdy,

First time post, thanks in advanced for any and all constructive responses.  I would like to know which rule (or set of rules) best governs this scenario to support the concluded ruling.  

I was umpiring an 8U (coach pitch) game when there was a batted ball hit to short stop.  When the throw came to first base it was errant and the caused the first baseman to stretch into the running lane (toward home plate and into foul territory directly into the path of the runner) and off the bag.  The first baseman did not catch, but knocked the ball to a rest in the running lane.  At this point the runner was in the running lane and impeded by the first baseman in the throwing/catching error.  The runner attempts to go around the first baseman. In picking up the dropped ball the fielder, unintentionally, further blocked the runner's efforts to move around and tagged first base for an out.  

Also please consider the safety of 8U baseball players who may choose to run over the fielder in this situation.  It could have been a train wreck.

Thanks!

[Senor Azul]

From the 2016 BRD (section 369, pp. 245-246):

FED:  If an errant throw pulls the first baseman into the runner’s base path, a collision before the fielder has possession of the ball is obstruction.

2019 NFHS Case Book Play 8.3.2 Situation K:  F6 fields a ground ball and throws to F3 in an attempt to retire B1 at first. The ball is thrown wide. As F3 lunges towards the ball, F3 collides with B1, knocking him to the ground prior to possessing the ball (a) while the runner is short of first base or (b) after the runner has contacted first base. RULING:  (a) Obstruction; (b) legal.

OBR:  Official Interpretation:  Wendelstedt:  If a fielder is in the act of receiving a throw from another fielder and there is unintentional contact between the fielder and a runner, there is generally no violation.

Play:  B1 hits to short. The throw pulls the first baseman away from the bag and into B1’s path before he touches the base. After the collision, F3 tags BR off the base. Ruling:  In FED/NCAA, BR is awarded first. In OBR, BR is out.

[grayhawk]

3 hours ago, Guest Rob said:

Howdy,

First time post, thanks in advanced for any and all constructive responses.  I would like to know which rule (or set of rules) best governs this scenario to support the concluded ruling.  

I was umpiring an 8U (coach pitch) game when there was a batted ball hit to short stop.  When the throw came to first base it was errant and the caused the first baseman to stretch into the running lane (toward home plate and into foul territory directly into the path of the runner) and off the bag.  The first baseman did not catch, but knocked the ball to a rest in the running lane.  At this point the runner was in the running lane and impeded by the first baseman in the throwing/catching error.  The runner attempts to go around the first baseman. In picking up the dropped ball the fielder, unintentionally, further blocked the runner's efforts to move around and tagged first base for an out.  

Also please consider the safety of 8U baseball players who may choose to run over the fielder in this situation.  It could have been a train wreck.

Thanks!

Do you know what rules this game was played under?  If so, do you have a copy of that rule book?  When umpires come in to ask these questions, it's always preferred that you attempt to locate the correct rule before asking.  Teach a man to fish, etc.  If not, no worries.  We will be happy to help you.

[maven]

Steve, I guess you know what you can do with your fishing...

[LRZ]

Even if played under modified OBR, like a summer league I work, I would be wary about applying the MLB interpretation to eight year olds. What do the LL rules say about this situation? 

[Senor Azul]

You raise a very good point, Mr. LRZ. And you are right—Little League would have a different ruling. In its rule 2.00 under the definition of the term Obstruction…

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).

INSTRUCTOR’S 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.

Runners are entitled to the entire base/plate without having to alter their path or slide to achieve the base or plate. If a fielder blocks ANY PART of the base or plate without possession of the ball and the runner is hindered, forced to slide or alter his/her path because of the fielder’s position, the runner has been obstructed.

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.

[umpstu]

2 hours ago, grayhawk said:

Do you know what rules this game was played under?  If so, do you have a copy of that rule book?  When umpires come in to ask these questions, it's always preferred that you attempt to locate the correct rule before asking.  Teach a man to fish, etc.  If not, no worries.  We will be happy to help you.

Use a cocktail stick!

[grayhawk]

1 hour ago, maven said:

Steve, I guess you know what you can do with your fishing...

Knew it would happen.  Eff me for encouraging a new umpire to get into the books...

[Guest Rob]

Thanks for the responses.  Yall, asked about governing rules.  The league states they use MLB rules with an overlay for applying rules.  I do not believe anything in the overlay relates to this situation.

[Double Up]

great question. 

[Biscuit]

1 hour ago, Guest Rob said:

Thanks for the responses.  Yall, asked about governing rules.  The league states they use MLB rules with an overlay for applying rules.  I do not believe anything in the overlay relates to this situation.

In that case, you want the ruling for OBR (OBR = Official baseball Rules = MLB rules). For that, look at @Senor Azul's responses. 

[LRZ]

I might be opening myself up to charges of "MSU" but I'd think long and hard about applying the Wendelstedt interpretation, intended for competent, adult players such as pros, to 8 y/o baseball. I'm certain that the youth league I primarily work, while based on the OBR rulebook, has never considered whether "official interpretations" such as HW, JE, or J/R govern.

We often posit that players must be aware of situations such as an IFF or an U3K. A Legion or HS player, sure; kids 8-10 or so, well, maybe that's an unreasonable assumption. If a MLB-based interpretation might be inappropriate, then what?

[Biscuit]

17 minutes ago, LRZ said:

I might be opening myself up to charges of "MSU" but I'd think long and hard about applying the Wendelstedt interpretation, intended for competent, adult players such as pros, to 8 y/o baseball. I'm certain that the youth league I primarily work, while based on the OBR rulebook, has never considered whether "official interpretations" such as HW, JE, or J/R govern.

We often posit that players must be aware of situations such as an IFF or an U3K. A Legion or HS player, sure; kids 8-10 or so, well, maybe that's an unreasonable assumption. If a MLB-based interpretation might be inappropriate, then what?

Then you're playing under house rules, and we can't really help. We're not your league, we can't give you what they want. We can only give what is written, and that is almost exclusively written for MLB or similar levels.

[LRZ]

Perhaps I was not clear, but what I was trying to say was this: an interpretation written "almost exclusively" for MLB-level play may not be appropriate for young kids. In such a situation, there is a gap between the rule, the MLB interpretation and the players' age and abilities. I'm not asking for help, I'm raising the issue for further discussion because the answer to Guest Rob's question is, IMO, not so simple, not so easy, especially in light of his safety concern.

[beerguy55]

3 hours ago, LRZ said:

Perhaps I was not clear, but what I was trying to say was this: an interpretation written "almost exclusively" for MLB-level play may not be appropriate for young kids. In such a situation, there is a gap between the rule, the MLB interpretation and the players' age and abilities. I'm not asking for help, I'm raising the issue for further discussion because the answer to Guest Rob's question is, IMO, not so simple, not so easy, especially in light of his safety concern.

I don't disagree with your assessment, but the reality is, no interpretation is going to address the safety issue, for the exact reasons you're highlighting about the age group.  At 8 years old either the runner is going to avoid the fielder at the expense of being called out, or the fielder is going to avoid the runner at the expense of the runner being safe, or either player is going to be oblivious to their danger and cause a collision - and no rule is going to change that.  The kids are either thinking about self-preservation, or not.

FED puts the onus on the fielder to avoid the runner until possession (at an age where players can understand the safety requirements and are physically able to do something about it)...OBR allows the the fielder to focus on catching the ball.

OBR is more in line with the reality of how a child is going to behave in that scenario.

[Guest Rob]

Thanks again. I appreciate the discussion.  The conclusion I'm getting from this is that since the league is Modified OBR that means the runner should have been called out, but pretty much any other rules set (even those typically applied to children this age) the runner would have been safe.  My job as an umpire is to call the game as per the rules that are set for that game, and therefore a correct call would have been to call the runner out.  I made the wrong call in this game.  Thanks for helping me learn so I can make a better call next time.  

[Jay R.]

On 10/21/2019 at 9:14 PM, Senor Azul said:

You raise a very good point, Mr. LRZ. And you are right—Little League would have a different ruling. In its rule 2.00 under the definition of the term Obstruction…

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).

INSTRUCTOR’S 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.

Runners are entitled to the entire base/plate without having to alter their path or slide to achieve the base or plate. If a fielder blocks ANY PART of the base or plate without possession of the ball and the runner is hindered, forced to slide or alter his/her path because of the fielder’s position, the runner has been obstructed.

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.

FWIW, the LL "UMPIRE SCHOOL RULES INSTRUCTION MANUAL (RIM)" for 2014 clarified that the play, as described, would not be obstruction. From page 27, which includes comments on Rule 2.00 (Obstruction):

“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 1st baseman down the line toward home plate and the 1st 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)."

[The Man in Blue]

On 10/21/2019 at 8:36 PM, grayhawk said:

Knew it would happen.  Eff me for encouraging a new umpire to get into the books...

Your intention is noble grayhawk ... your method could use some work.  

Just saying “go fish” is not teaching someone to fish.

[Senor Azul]

Mr. Jay R., the Instructor’s Comments I posted are from the 2019 Little League Rules Instruction Manual (RIM). I should have posted a full citation—my apologies.

The comment that you cite was in the RIM through 2018 but for some reason it is not there in the 2019 edition. I haven’t found a reason stated online for the deletion yet. The definition of the term obstruction and the related instructor comments now appear on page 25 of the 2019 edition.

[Jay R.]

9 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

Mr. Jay R., the Instructor’s Comments I posted are from the 2019 Little League Rules Instruction Manual (RIM). I should have posted a full citation—my apologies.

The comment that you cite was in the RIM through 2018 but for some reason it is not there in the 2019 edition. I haven’t found a reason stated online for the deletion yet. The definition of the term obstruction and the related instructor comments now appear on page 25 of the 2019 edition.

I should have known better than to quibble with a Senor Azul citation.

That's really interesting that they actively removed that---I'm really curious as to why.