Blocking the plate

[guero_gordo]

Always set up inside (AKA New England Catching Camp) and avoid the collision. (Whenever possible) Not only will your catcher be in a safer position and make the tag, they can come around after the tag looking for the double play. (You can't do that after being used as a human bowling pin!)
-Chaz @ ACC

Fear not, I'm not going to ask DD to change that setup until I hear it from Jay ;-)
Being in the Bay Area, the girls idolize Buster Posey, so we have had many discussions about Carlton Fisk having learned the same lesson and lasting a mighty long time afterward.

 

[MsDinosaur]

The third pic the runner may be safe, but most kids I know would have tackled the catcher out of sheer GP. I wouldn't coach or teach that position for the catcher. It is very dangerous for them to have their knee down like that. It is much more safe to have the shinguard and knee facing the oncoming runner and fall to a knee to reach the tag after or during the course of receiving the ball. I teach them to take away the inside of the plate, the outside belongs to the runner. The throw either makes it on time or it doesn't.-W

I agree. The way this catcher is set up in picture 3 was effective (because blue didn't call obs and maybe most never would), but dangerous. Judging it as best as I can from the runner's perspective, I either have to basically give up or I have to slide as hard and fast as I possibly can at the small area with about a foot of height clearance at the first base side corner of the plate, bounded by the catcher's right foot and ankle.

 

[SBFAMILY]

MY post is out of the umpire casebook and Bretman posted this on a prior post and he is 25+ umpire. If you have the umpire casebook it covers these type of questions. If you take the exam it helps you understand the rules in a case by case basis. You can order it thru ASA umpire section and is a must have is you want to understand the meaning of a rule.

http://rvua.org/Webpages/ASA/2008Casebook.pdf

 

[GI Tom]

SBFAMILY,

Not sure what the casebook has to do with the definition of OBS. Your OP stated that two things need to happen for OBS, the blocking of a base and impeding the runner.

The blocking of a base (I'm taking you literally here) could potentially lead to an OBS call, but is not required as you stated. The impeding of a runner by the defense as stated in the definition is what determines OBS.

That was the part of your post I was stating was not correct. My apologies for not making that clear originally.

 

[SBFAMILY]

My response was a cut and paste of the same question and the answer was from the umpire that does our training. We are required to use the casebook, because it states why each decision is made then explains the rule. He has been doing this for 25 plus years. He does come on this site, so I will ask him to address your response. He knows the rules better than anyone I know

 

[Comp]

It is entirely possible for a fielder to be blocking a base without the ball, but for the runner to never slow down, go around or otherwise deviate from her chosen path to the base. In that case, then the runner was not obstructed.

As I read this again, I can see where depending on how you read it can be taken in 2 contexts. Going back and reading it with the understanding of the runner did not slow down, did not go around, did not deviate and did not alter her chosen path, then no, obstruction did not occur. But, if any of those elements did occur to the runner by a defensive player without the ball, then obstrcution would have occured regardless of if the runner slowed down or not.