With the clip paused at 0:29, you can see the catcher's rear foot in fair territory on the second base side of home. The catcher was positioned in fair territory, NOT blocking the path to the plate until she had to reposition to make the catch. This is textbook NOT obstruction. I am a HUGE OU fan, but sadly, this was the correct call. The catcher played this perfectly.

That's only in high school, NCAA is different.

I have a collision rule violation due to rules. 12.13.1.4 & 12.13.1.5. The runner has to attempt to avoid contact if she could’ve made it to the plate. ( her trying to [barely] step around to touch the plate, is not avoiding contact. ) And if the runner deliberately makes contact, and remains on her feet after the fielder possesses the ball for the tag. Basically, the runner has a clear option to slide to avoid contact. Slow down, or veer off to the right.

Negative ghost rider.

Not true on 2 accounts. 1. I specifically added in the video at the end….putting in the line before she “started her swing”. 2. The batter’s zone is not defined by when the batter steps in the box way before the pitch….its when she’s taking a pitch/about to swing. Why? It just wasn’t the case, batters will be able to find the loop pool of getting in the box and having a really, really tiny stance, and then right before the pitch comes, stand up and swinging. Same idea.

The base "path" is determined at the time of the tag attempt, not before. She could have rounded her path a bit more and MAYBE gotten around the tag legally.

In order for it to be “legit”. She hast to have the ball before the runner starts her slide. Then, you can use the argument of the runner, not being close to the plate, and she would be out.

It's to demonstrate the mechanic we use on a time play to indicate to both teams and the official scorer that the run counts. We have to come up big on this to avoid any confusion. It's a staple of any umpire school.

The commented response to your comment is correct. It’s to teach/show the proper mechanic, not only for what he stated, but so umpires know what it looks like…Especially for close plays.

Nope.

The definition of “errant throw” is whether or not to catch your needed to move to successfully receive the ball. Unfortunately there’s just not much better way of going about it….. At least when you’re factoring in the well-being of the student athlete in regards to collisions, which is a big reason on why this entire rule is in place.

Just like many other instances in the game, a lot of things are “judgment” calls.

Rules are rules

In NCAA softball, it is absolutely already defined on how early the Obstruction occur. I can’t speak for any other association. There is a specific rule in NCAA Softball, that states, if the runner is “clearly beaten by the throw”, the obstruction/blocking of the base/path shall be ignored…. Now, what is the interpretation of “clearly being by the throw”?, For it to be “clearly beaten by the throw”? -the ball must beat the runner (caught by catcher), and the runner not be reasonably able to start her slide. In this/both situations, the runner was already starting the process of her slide attempt, before the catcher received the ball… so “clearly beaten by the throw” would not apply. [This information can be found in the NCAA softball casebook, not the rule book]

@@UmpireLive Thanks. Sounds like the point where the runner starts her slide is the "when". When the slide starts, if the base is blocked, then it's obstruction.

@@mae2759 correct!

It’s not as vague as “in the act of fielding the ball”. The rules specifically states that future must be making a legitimate attempt to fill the ball. Further interpretation explains what legitimate means, - it means that the catcher can only move to an otherwise obstructing positioning if she “needed” to move there successfully, field the ball. The two examples in the video, are a good illustration on the difference between errant and non-errant.

@UmpireLive okay .. it still seems like it an "iffy" call either .. I'm glad I'm not anump in this era

NCAA softball does not make it a requirement to impede the runners base path to have obstruction. The old rule did not say this either, but the new rule this year is that they cannot block any portion of the base/ basepath without the ball, unless they are fielding an errant throw.

Anytime obstruction is called, and an out occurs on that runner that was obstructed. The play becomes dead, and runners can not advance. If the runner was safe on the tag, then the OBS is nullified like to never existed.

Right, doesn’t happen to often but clearly she’s looked into the new rules a bit.

It’s a horrible rule change that benefits a bad throw.

@@SouthernSooner-wn3el Take off the crimson glasses and look at it objectively. The throw took the catcher up the line. She has just as much right to make the catch as the runner has to home plate.

@@tomm3082 I do look at it objectively, it was a terrible throw that was 8 feet down the line, the catcher could have easily caught the ball in the field of play not 3 ft in foul territory, it was a bad rule change.

Guess you don’t know the NCAA Strikezone.

Not the bottom of the sternum.

That’s unfortunate to hear. Probably missed a decent amount of calls due to it.

Never. I always went to the back corner of the RH box and adjusted as needed.

@@actionhero27 with a catcher in front of the plate, you can’t see the tag on the inside left hip of the runner from there.

So their 7 inning games don’t make the fans suffer any longer

@@blauer2551 But its already a short game. Makes since in Baseball as those games take over 3 hours. Softball is over in like 2, so no need for a pitch clock.

Likely because the pitch clock was implemented this season, and batters are still adjusting to the new hurry up style of play.

@@vardoger3379 I would agree if it wasn't for the fact both the batter catcher pitcher and umpire can see the clock and have been practicing before the season started

@@MarcG7424 I think you're determined to accuse the athlete of ignorance rather than attempt to understand her confusion. While the pervading thought on this video is "she should know better", the lot of us could be better by practicing some restraint in our accusations.

@@vardoger3379 It's a opinion to an observation just like yours but I'm glad you're so willing to give the benefit of the doubt I hope you keep that same energy

@@MarcG7424 Thank you for the kind regards. Hope you have a great day!