The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 25, 2018, 01:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 534
You make the call: NFHS game- Malicious contact at the plate?

I wont even try to describe the play. Ill let you watch for yourself and decide what, if anything, youd call.

https://www.sportsgossip.com/other/i...late-collision
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 25, 2018, 03:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,073
MC (well, OBS first, but the MC trumps that)
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 25, 2018, 09:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 751
MC

Probably the easiest call of the game.

However.........
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 25, 2018, 09:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,191
Big discussion here:

NFHS Malicious Contact????? - Free For All - Umpire-Empire
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 25, 2018, 10:53pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: NeverNeverLand
Posts: 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives View Post
Too many times the onus is put on the runner! Right Mr. Ives?

I have an F2 who has learned a valuable lesson!

I saw a rear angle on the play, and it may have changed my mind. WOW!

But in real time as PU, I most likely would have had the same call. Crew could have got together and ruled differently.
__________________
"A picture is worth a thousand words".

Last edited by thumpferee; Thu Jul 26, 2018 at 07:00am.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 30, 2018, 06:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 553
Send a message via AIM to BoomerSooner
I can see the argument that the catcher drifting into the path of the runner was the cause for the contact and agree with this being OBS on F2. I think OBS is the right call until the moment the runner decides to level the catcher. Based on what I saw, the runner's step toward the catcher at the last moment combined with the forearms to the upper chest/neck/head area not only increased the severity of the contact but were unnecessary which leads me to believe this was MC.

Had the runner continued to widen his route to home farther into foul territory (which it appears that he did take a step in that direction), I believe the contact wouldn't have been as severe, and even if the contact were severe, I wouldn't have faulted the runner.
__________________
My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions." --George W. Bush
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 30, 2018, 09:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomerSooner View Post
I can see the argument that the catcher drifting into the path of the runner was the cause for the contact and agree with this being OBS on F2. I think OBS is the right call until the moment the runner decides to level the catcher. Based on what I saw, the runner's step toward the catcher at the last moment combined with the forearms to the upper chest/neck/head area not only increased the severity of the contact but were unnecessary which leads me to believe this was MC.

Had the runner continued to widen his route to home farther into foul territory (which it appears that he did take a step in that direction), I believe the contact wouldn't have been as severe, and even if the contact were severe, I wouldn't have faulted the runner.
Unnecessary? Putting up your arms is a natural, normal way to brace for impact. Run at a wall and I betcha you'd do the same thing. I'll even let you run at a padded wall. Now suppose the wall moves into your path.
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 01, 2018, 10:30am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives View Post
Unnecessary? Putting up your arms is a natural, normal way to brace for impact. Run at a wall and I betcha you'd do the same thing. I'll even let you run at a padded wall. Now suppose the wall moves into your path.
But putting up your arms and attempting to blast through that wall is not natural, normal, or sane. It's moronic.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 02, 2018, 09:37am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 553
Send a message via AIM to BoomerSooner
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives View Post
Unnecessary? Putting up your arms is a natural, normal way to brace for impact. Run at a wall and I betcha you'd do the same thing. I'll even let you run at a padded wall. Now suppose the wall moves into your path.
I'll agree that I'm probably going to put my arms up to protect myself if I'm running at a wall, whether it is padded or not. I'm also going to slow down or veer to the side to avoid running directly into the wall as opposed to lowering my upper body and extending my arms in an attempt to blast my way through the wall.

The only thing that I will add, is that I will admit that in real time from the umpire's perspective, it is a tough call that I would have defended to those around me had I been a spectator (which is pretty much my default stance when watching a game).
__________________
My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions." --George W. Bush
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 02, 2018, 09:46am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomerSooner View Post
The only thing that I will add, is that I will admit that in real time from the umpire's perspective, it is a tough call that I would have defended to those around me had I been a spectator (which is pretty much my default stance when watching a game).
The problem is that the 1BU did not get into position to see the collision. He straight-lined himself so that he couldn't see the actual impact; he could only see the catcher's back.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 05, 2018, 09:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5
I have this as MC, no doubt. I think the reason we still have blatant MC in high school ball is; umpires do not enforce obstruction. If the runner gives up, or takes a route in which he is tagged out, he must be rewarded for staying within the rules.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 08, 2018, 04:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blindguy View Post
I think the reason we still have blatant MC in high school ball is; umpires do not enforce obstruction.
And because umpires do not enforce ejection for malicious contact, as in this play.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 12, 2018, 08:01pm
Coach Paul
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 49
I was expecting the BU to get trucked ;-)
__________________
Coach Paul
www.cmbua.org
Board Certified Umpire /
Baseball Instructor / Coach
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
You Make The Call (Blocked Shot and Contact) APG Basketball 59 Sat May 11, 2013 12:42pm
Malicious Contact? Spence Baseball 17 Wed Jun 10, 2009 07:32am
Malicious contact? SouthGARef Baseball 24 Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:26am
Obstruction/interference/"malicious" contact non-ruling (NFHS)... jcwells Baseball 7 Wed Jul 09, 2008 06:04pm
Malicious Contact Gre144 Baseball 1 Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:42am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:02pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1