Sitch:

 

R1 is on third with no outs. R1 attempts to score on a flyball to F8. F8’s throw to F2 is near perfect. R1 sees that the play is going to be close. As F2 stretches for the ball to tag R1, R1 attempts to hurdle F2’s outstretched arms as the ball bounces in front of the plate and skips into dead-ball territory. As R1 is in the air, F2’s glove catches R1’s foot and both lose their balance and tumble to the ground. R1 crawls back and touches the plate.

 

What ya got, blue?

 

You've got one fine mess;). Actually, if I had to go out on a limb, I'd call the runner safe. He's not jumping over the catcher, just his glove and the catcher doesn't have possesion of the ball anyway. You could rule he was simply trying to avoid contact with the catcher as he could have seen the ball skip away. It could technically be ruled obstruction because the catcher made physical contact with the baserunner without the ball which prevented the runner from immediately being able to reach the base, but the umpire is supposed to let the play continue according to the rule. Since the runner did eventually reach the base safely, the obstruction is ignored. On another note, since the ball went into dead ball territory from the throw, the runner is entitled to the next base (in this case home plate) anyway. Unless the umpire ruled that the runner was attempting to purposely contact the catcher, there is no way you could rule him out. I think.:lol:

Does it state "possession of the ball" or does it say "making a play on the ball"??

 

The fielder need not get out of the way of the runner when IN POSSESSION of the ball. The way the rule reads, it doesn't matter if he is making a play on the ball or not. If he is not in possession, if the fielder alters the runners path to the base in anyway (physical contact is not necessary), then obstruction can be called. Most umpires have a fairly liberal interpretation of what is actually altering the path. Usually, if any part of the base can be touched by the runner, then obstruction won't be called. Short of the fielder laying on the base, or putting his whole leg (or any other body part) on the base completely covering the front edge, obstruction won't be called.

You've got one fine mess;). Actually, if I had to go out on a limb, I'd call the runner safe. He's not jumping over the catcher, just his glove and the catcher doesn't have possesion of the ball anyway. You could rule he was simply trying to avoid contact with the catcher as he could have seen the ball skip away. It could technically be ruled obstruction because the catcher made physical contact with the baserunner without the ball which prevented the runner from immediately being able to reach the base, but the umpire is supposed to let the play continue according to the rule. Since the runner did eventually reach the base safely, the obstruction is ignored. On another note, since the ball went into dead ball territory from the throw, the runner is entitled to the next base (in this case home plate) anyway. Unless the umpire ruled that the runner was attempting to purposely contact the catcher, there is no way you could rule him out. I think.:lol:

 

I agree on calling him safe.