|
I'm all for the "see an offense, make an ejection" philosophy, whereas an offensive action doesn't necessarily need to be directed at you to make the ejection. There's been too many times where my partner had heard quite a few comments from the dugouts (not just mumbling and grumbling, but along the lines of "My batter had to pull his pantlegs up so you could see his knees, blue!") that I just didn't hear, but my partner didn't eject because he thought it should have been "my call."
But I can see where this "malicious contact" rule in most youth leagues could cross the line between making someone else's "judgement call" and seeing a possible ejection. Scenario: You're BU, and there's a collision at home. PU calls safe, judges that the runner's contact was not malicious, that he even attempted to avoid contact. From the field, you saw that the runner did move, but only to get a "cleaner shot" of F2, and did throw an elbow into him, so you toss him. Now by ejecting the runner you've essentially also reversed your partner's judgement call. Now judging intent/no intent is along the same lines as out/safe.
How should this situation be approached, where an "ejectable judgement" call is seen differently between two umpires?
|