Horrible obstruction call UCLA vs stanford

This rule is so dumb. Reality is did a player without the ball impede the runners progress. I don’t care if you’re reacting to the ball. The defense should not be rewarded for a bad throw. The receiver should have to get to the ball without impeding the runner. It should be a judgement. I know this isn’t the way it’s written but in my mind this is how it should be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dabears17 said:

I agree. I’ve watched part of it, but not the whole thing. I went to an USA Umpire School in January and in an off the record side conversation, an NCAA D1 umpire said the coaches really can’t complain because they vote on rule changes and they approved the rule changes. Umpires can’t ignore rules that make no logical sense. They have to foillow what is in the Book.

Click to expand...

That resonates with me but I don't think this was called according to the rule

I am umpiring a whole lot less college games this year because I still can't get a good, clear view from the NCAA on how I am meant to be calling obstruction. If you can't tell me what to call and when, then what do I when it happens? If they can't get it consistent with D1 officials and replay, what chance do I have on some D2 game when I have to deal with it in live action?

And yes, a big part of this is because the college coaches are the decision makers when it comes to playing rules and they don't know what they are doing when it comes to rules formation and formatting. This is not what the umpires wanted.

I really wish everyone would just chose a ruleset and go with it (but not the NCAA one - that one is screwy - and not USA.... NFHS is probably as good as there is currently and that also has issues). You could add all the BS admin stuff and just leave the action stuff alone.

I stopped doing volleyball because they have a similarly screwed up handling rule (where they literally have training videos that say "some umps will call this, and some wont".. OK - but what am I MEANT to call?)

A catcher can 'react to the balls trajectory' that happens to be off-line, and wander into the base path while staring out at the OF. seems not ideal.

CoachCeetar said:

A catcher can 'react to the balls trajectory' that happens to be off-line, and wander into the base path while staring out at the OF. seems not ideal.

Click to expand...

There is no way to make the plays (particularly at home) perfectly safe without ruining them. I think the current rule is fine if just not applied so inconsistently and in the Stanford case erroneously. We have to remember we came from runners intentionally mowing down catchers...much safer now.

Tazman said:

There is no way to make the plays (particularly at home) perfectly safe without ruining them. I think the current rule is fine if just not applied so inconsistently and in the Stanford case erroneously. We have to remember we came from runners intentionally mowing down catchers...much safer now.

Click to expand...

The NFHS rule works pretty well in both being clear to call and safety. It is mostly the same rule that is USSSA and USA as well,

The real issue for me calling obstruction is that people see the NCAA rule on TV applied differently (and also the commenters have no idea) and have no clue how the rules differ so they get all upset on other sanctions. I can't count the number of times I have said "It is different in college" in a HS or travel game in the past few years.

The USA, nfhs and usssa obstruction rules are virtually identical, not sure why you think the USA obstruction rule is different.

Better view of the play at about the 4:15 mark in this video.

When I first saw this in the original post I thought that the runner should have been called out. When I see this in the YouTube video I can see this going either way.

Even more clear...OUT. Obstruction......no way.

Gambler Bob said:

Better view of the play at about the 4:15 mark in this video.

When I first saw this in the original post I thought that the runner should have been called out. When I see this in the YouTube video I can see this going either way.

Click to expand...

I'm genuinely looking for someone with a rationale on obstruction. You think she set up in the running lane without being pulled their by the ball? Old rules I can see obstruction if called really aggressively (barely). New rules I just can't.