Overheard a coach say...

[umpire99]

...at a rules meeting the other night. The interpreter was explaining malicious contact. He said: "Remember, you can have one heck of a collision and have nothing if it was unavoidable." The coach (28 years of experience) said under his breath: "No way. The runner has to slide."

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by umpire99

...at a rules meeting the other night. The interpreter was explaining malicious contact. He said: "Remember, you can have one heck of a collision and have nothing if it was unavoidable." The coach (28 years of experience) said under his breath: "No way. The runner has to slide."

And I overheard SAump say

Ah, never mind.

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by umpire99

...at a rules meeting the other night. The interpreter was explaining malicious contact. He said: "Remember, you can have one heck of a collision and have nothing if it was unavoidable." The coach (28 years of experience) said under his breath: "No way. The runner has to slide."

Which is why WE umpire and THEY coach

[David B]

Originally Posted by umpire99

...at a rules meeting the other night. The interpreter was explaining malicious contact. He said: "Remember, you can have one heck of a collision and have nothing if it was unavoidable." The coach (28 years of experience) said under his breath: "No way. The runner has to slide."

Yeah, heard the same comment the other night at second base - runner came in standing up on DP - he has to slide etc.,

I don't think they will ever learn ...

Thnaks
DAvid

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by umpire99

...at a rules meeting the other night. The interpreter was explaining malicious contact. He said: "Remember, you can have one heck of a collision and have nothing if it was unavoidable." The coach (28 years of experience) said under his breath: "No way. The runner has to slide."

"Show me the rule, there coach, that says a runner has to slide!"

[canadaump6]

Why do they allow the runner to collide with the catcher at the mlb level? That is malicious contact.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by canadaump6

Why do they allow the runner to collide with the catcher at the mlb level? That is malicious contact.

Citation, please.

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by canadaump6

Why do they allow the runner to collide with the catcher at the mlb level? That is malicious contact.

They are professionals, so that rule is not necessary. Amateur leagues want to keep the football in the fall

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Citation, please.

Garth,

Since you asked so nicely, I believe this is the only one pertinent to MLB play.

From the MLBUM, 6.1 Offensive Interference:

While contact may occur between a fielder and runner during a tag attempt, a runner is not allowed to use his hands or arms to commit an obviously malicious or unsportsmanlike act-such as grabbing, tackling, intentionally slapping at the baseball, punching, kicking, flagrantly using his arms or forearms, etc.-to commit an intentional act of interference unrelated to running the bases. ... Depending on the severity of the infraction, it is possible the player may be ejected for such conduct.

Personally, having witnessed how contact at the plate is treated in MLB games, I have no idea what it means.

JM

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Garth,

Since you asked so nicely, I believe this is the only one pertinent to MLB play.

From the MLBUM, 6.1 Offensive Interference:



Personally, having witnessed how contact at the plate is treated in MLB games, I have no idea what it means.

JM

I should have been clearer in my request. I was looking for an OBR rule citation on Malicious Contact, not an interpretation of Offensive Interference.

[UmpJM]

Garth,

Ahhh. I don't believe I've ever seen that. And I've looked pretty carefully. Perhaps I missed it.

JM

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Garth,

Ahhh. I don't believe I've ever seen that. And I've looked pretty carefully. Perhaps I missed it.

JM

That would be my point. It isn't there.

The myth that pro baseball is men playing a boy's game generates some thoughts such as this. In reality, kids playing baseball are playing a man's game.

Baseball was and is designed for adults. That's why FED, LL and others have altered the rules.

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Baseball was and is designed for adults. That's why FED, LL and others have altered the rules.

Which is why it boggles my mind why summer leagues always want to use OBR rules... Then they have to change a million things and forget to add penalties for the rules they make up which leaves umpires scratching their head.

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Garth,

Since you asked so nicely, I believe this is the only one pertinent to MLB play.

From the MLBUM, 6.1 Offensive Interference:



Personally, having witnessed how contact at the plate is treated in MLB games, I have no idea what it means.

JM

Read what you posted carefully!

While contact may occur between a fielder and runner during a tag attempt, a runner is not allowed to use his hands or arms to commit an obviously malicious or unsportsmanlike act-such as grabbing, tackling, intentionally slapping at the baseball, punching, kicking, flagrantly using his arms or forearms, etc.-to commit an intentional act of interference unrelated to running the bases. ... Depending on the severity of the infraction, it is possible the player may be ejected for such conduct.

What they don't want is a runner going by a fielder and clocking him for no good reason. Now, if that fielder has the ball and is trying to tag the base runner, he is now fair game for the clocking!

[UmpJM]

rei,

I'm a pretty careful reader, and I'm usually pretty careful about what I post.

The MLBUM interpretation I posted is, on occasion, indisputably incongruous with how the game is actually ruled during MLB games in regard to plays at the plate. (My personal favorite is the Erstad-Estrada collision; in my mind, materially different from the more famous Rose-Fosse collision. Curiously, the A-Rod play was very consistent with this interpretation.)

As Garth points out, there is no OBR rule against it; so, maybe the MLBUM interp is more of a "guideline" than a "rule"1.

JM

(Edited to footnote reference.)

1. Ghostbusters, 1984