|
This is tough one for me. Some of you have mentioned that the runner did not alter her path, but she seemed to sense a close play coming up. The catcher was in the base path, significantly up the line from the plate. The runner did not alter her course, did not crash into the catcher while on her feet, could not jump over the catcher since the catcher wasn't prone.
Literally a split second before the catcher has the ball, the runner apparently has already decided to go into a goofy head first dive. While she didn't veer left or right, or jump, she did take an alternate path to HP.
Since the runner wasn't on her feet at the time of the crash, this may absolve her of MC per NFHS rules 8-6-14 She remains on her feet and maliciously crashes into a defensive player. Malicious contact supersedes obstruction. Penalty follows.
2-35 is a bit less direct: "Malicious contact is an act that involves excessive force with an opponent."
So to me, MC would be a situation where the runner actually has time to recognize that the defensive player actually has the ball and is waiting to apply the tag, but yet the runner decides to try to bowl her over by running upright into the defender.
I didn't see that in this case.
As far as a wreck, if the catcher had been positioned out of the runner's path and then made an attempt to field the ball that was a bit off line, and then there was a collision, I'd say that qualifies.
NFHS 8-4-3-b, which I'm sure you're all familiar with:
Art 3 A runner is entitled to advance without liability to be put out when:
b. a fielder not in possession of the ball or not making an initial play on a batted ball, impedes the progress of a runner or BR who is legally running bases. Obstructed runners are still required to touch all bases in proper order, or they could be called out on a proper appeal by the defensive team. Should an act of interference occur following any obstruction, enforcement of the interference penalty would have precedence.
As mentioned, that PU had a lot going on during that play. We have the benefit of slow motion and stop action. But live, that was tough. When I see the catcher squatting on the foul line with a runner bearing down on her and the throw is coming in, simply stated she is not in possession of the ball. Yes, that split second later she does, but the runner wouldn't be able to see that or react. Had there been a call for OBS, I couldn't argue against it.
Ted
|