Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve
Yeah, I'm pretty sure azbigdawg knows the umpire; it;s been several years, but I'm pretty sure I know him, too.
My $.02. At full speed, I could justify both obstruction and a no-call; it happened that fast to be almost simultaneous. Ball arrived a split second after the runner, but that requires the slow-mo replay viewed several times. And, yes, the catcher shuffled deeper the last instant, apparently playing the hop on the throw. Easy to second guess with Monday morning replay.
But we also see the last three steps of the runner, and she is already raising to drive her arms into the catcher. Ejection is warranted, in my opinion; in that last three steps she was clearly NOT attempting to avoid the collision (which is stated as the intent of the rule in the rule itself), rather, I am convinced she thought she had a free shot.
Unfortunately, D, I don't see NCAA rule support for the out. JMO.
I assume this has been run past SA and MB; what were their comments?
|
I will see Steve next week and run it past him. MB says possible obstruction, ejection warranted..possible hole in the rule. He chatted about a couple of things to consider in reference to the obs...
I have asked 3 different people who have been or will be in OKC one day... the only consistent yes is the ejection.
2 of them had to revisit the rule about collisions in reference to the out call.
Only ejection in 6-7 is becoming a pain...