Malicious Contact Supercedes Obstruction right?

[mrm21711]

Got this in my email inbox as part of the Gerry Davis Sports Newsletter. This guy wrote in and here was the response:

Bob Delzer, Kaukana, Wis. – Here is a play I ran into in an American Legion baseball game using the NFHS malicious contact rule. Runners at second and third, one out. The third baseman is even with the bag. Ball is hit to the third baseman and goes between his legs to left field. After the ball passes, R2 has to push the third baseman out of the way to get to third. I called obstruction (and got no argument from any one). Next, the runner rounds third and heads for home. The left fielder throws home and because of the obstruction the play is close. As the catcher receives the ball at home plate the runner plows him over. I called malicious contact and ejected the runner (again no argument from any one). Question: Does the run count? I awarded the run because the obstruction happened at a base prior to the malicious contact and, in my judgment, the obstruction prevented the runner from scoring. I understand if the two violations occur together the malicious contact supersedes the obstruction, but does that apply when the two acts occur at different places and times?

For help we turned to Dennis Meadows, the high school baseball rules interpreter for Arizona: “In this case the plays are taken in the order that they happened. So award home on the obstruction, score the run and eject for malicious contact.”

This is wrong isnt it? If MC occurs before runner scoring, ball is immediately dead and that runner is out and ejected...therefore no run could hypothetically score right?

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by mrm21711

Got this in my email inbox as part of the Gerry Davis Sports Newsletter. This guy wrote in and here was the response:

Bob Delzer, Kaukana, Wis. – Here is a play I ran into in an American Legion baseball game using the NFHS malicious contact rule. Runners at second and third, one out. The third baseman is even with the bag. Ball is hit to the third baseman and goes between his legs to left field. After the ball passes, R2 has to push the third baseman out of the way to get to third. I called obstruction (and got no argument from any one). Next, the runner rounds third and heads for home. The left fielder throws home and because of the obstruction the play is close. As the catcher receives the ball at home plate the runner plows him over. I called malicious contact and ejected the runner (again no argument from any one). Question: Does the run count? I awarded the run because the obstruction happened at a base prior to the malicious contact and, in my judgment, the obstruction prevented the runner from scoring. I understand if the two violations occur together the malicious contact supersedes the obstruction, but does that apply when the two acts occur at different places and times?

For help we turned to Dennis Meadows, the high school baseball rules interpreter for Arizona: “In this case the plays are taken in the order that they happened. So award home on the obstruction, score the run and eject for malicious contact.”

This is wrong isnt it? If MC occurs before runner scoring, ball is immediately dead and that runner is out and ejected...therefore no run could hypothetically score right?

Legion has its own collision rule:

E. Collisions. The intent of this rule is to encourage base runners and defensive players to avoid collisions
whenever possible.
1. When there is a collision between a runner and a fielder who clearly is in possession of the ball,
the umpire shall judge:
a) Whether the collision by the runner was avoidable (could the runner have reached the base without
colliding) or unavoidable (the runner’s path to the base was blocked) or
b) Whether the runner was actually attempting to reach the base (plate) or was he attempting to
dislodge the ball from the fielder.
PENALTY - If the runner, a) could have avoided the collision and reached the base, or b) attempted to
dislodge the ball, the runner shall be declared out, even if the fielder loses possession of the ball. The
ball is dead and all base runners shall return to the last base touched at the time of the interference.
Ruling 1: - If the fielder blocks the path of the base runner to the base (plate), the runner may make
contact, slide into, or collide with a fielder as long as the runner is making a legitimate attempt to
reach the base or plate.
Ruling 2: - If the collision by the runner was flagrant, the runner shall be declared out and ejected
from the contest. The ball shall be declared dead.
2. If the defensive player blocks the base (plate) or base line without the ball, obstruction shall be
called. The runner is safe and a delayed dead ball shall be called.
Ruling: - If the runner collides flagrantly, he shall be declared safe on the obstruction, but will be
ejected from the contest. The ball is dead.

[mrm21711]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Legion has its own collision rule:

E. Collisions. The intent of this rule is to encourage base runners and defensive players to avoid collisions
whenever possible.
1. When there is a collision between a runner and a fielder who clearly is in possession of the ball,
the umpire shall judge:
a) Whether the collision by the runner was avoidable (could the runner have reached the base without
colliding) or unavoidable (the runner’s path to the base was blocked) or
b) Whether the runner was actually attempting to reach the base (plate) or was he attempting to
dislodge the ball from the fielder.
PENALTY - If the runner, a) could have avoided the collision and reached the base, or b) attempted to
dislodge the ball, the runner shall be declared out, even if the fielder loses possession of the ball. The
ball is dead and all base runners shall return to the last base touched at the time of the interference.
Ruling 1: - If the fielder blocks the path of the base runner to the base (plate), the runner may make
contact, slide into, or collide with a fielder as long as the runner is making a legitimate attempt to
reach the base or plate.
Ruling 2: - If the collision by the runner was flagrant, the runner shall be declared out and ejected
from the contest. The ball shall be declared dead.
2. If the defensive player blocks the base (plate) or base line without the ball, obstruction shall be
called. The runner is safe and a delayed dead ball shall be called.
Ruling: - If the runner collides flagrantly, he shall be declared safe on the obstruction, but will be
ejected from the contest. The ball is dead.

Im saying under NFHS (and the NFHS rule pretty much seems to apply to the above situation) the run wouldnt score because at the moment the MC occurs the ball is dead and the runner is automatically out. Right?

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by mrm21711

Im saying under NFHS (and the NFHS rule pretty much seems to apply to the above situation) the run wouldnt score because at the moment the MC occurs the ball is dead and the runner is automatically out. Right?

The runner is not out because the AWARD of home occurred before the MC. Even though the ball is dead on the MC, the ejected runner is permitted to complete the base award.

[Dave Reed]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

The runner is not out because the AWARD of home occurred before the MC. Even though the ball is dead on the MC, the ejected runner is permitted to complete the base award.

No. Assuming you are referring to NFHS, the following caseplay shows that runner is out, and the run does not score.

"3.3.1 SITUATION S: With two outs and the bases loaded, B6 hits a home run out of the park. R3 maliciously runs over (a) F4 before touching second base or (b) F5 before touching third. RULING: In both (a) and (b), R3 is declared out and ejected. In (a), the third out is a force, so no runs score. In (b), the third out was not a force play, so runners who have touched the plate prior to the infraction would score. Please note that in awarded situations it is not the base that is awarded, but rather the right to advance and legally touch a base with no play being made."

Note that in screwy FED notation R3 means the runner who was on first base.

R3 (usually termed R1) is awarded home by the home run, but he is not allowed to complete the award, because he is declared out for malicious contact.

[mrm21711]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

No. Assuming you are referring to NFHS, the following caseplay shows that runner is out, and the run does not score.

"3.3.1 SITUATION S: With two outs and the bases loaded, B6 hits a home run out of the park. R3 maliciously runs over (a) F4 before touching second base or (b) F5 before touching third. RULING: In both (a) and (b), R3 is declared out and ejected. In (a), the third out is a force, so no runs score. In (b), the third out was not a force play, so runners who have touched the plate prior to the infraction would score. Please note that in awarded situations it is not the base that is awarded, but rather the right to advance and legally touch a base with no play being made."

Note that in screwy FED notation R3 means the runner who was on first base.

R3 (usually termed R1) is awarded home by the home run, but he is not allowed to complete the award, because he is declared out for malicious contact.

FYI - I was referring to NFHS rules.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

No. Assuming you are referring to NFHS, the following caseplay shows that runner is out, and the run does not score.

"3.3.1 SITUATION S: With two outs and the bases loaded, B6 hits a home run out of the park. R3 maliciously runs over (a) F4 before touching second base or (b) F5 before touching third. RULING: In both (a) and (b), R3 is declared out and ejected. In (a), the third out is a force, so no runs score. In (b), the third out was not a force play, so runners who have touched the plate prior to the infraction would score. Please note that in awarded situations it is not the base that is awarded, but rather the right to advance and legally touch a base with no play being made."

Note that in screwy FED notation R3 means the runner who was on first base.

R3 (usually termed R1) is awarded home by the home run, but he is not allowed to complete the award, because he is declared out for malicious contact.

Point well taken. Now consider this one: The batter is hit by a pitch and is awarded 1st base. However, instead of going to 1st, he charges the mound and maliciously contacts F1. He is ejected, but is he declared out as well, thereby nullifying the award, or is a substitute runner placed on 1st base?

[Toadman15241]

Originally Posted by mrm21711

Got this in my email inbox as part of the Gerry Davis Sports Newsletter. This guy wrote in and here was the response:

Bob Delzer, Kaukana, Wis. – Here is a play I ran into in an American Legion baseball game using the NFHS malicious contact rule. Runners at second and third, one out. The third baseman is even with the bag. Ball is hit to the third baseman and goes between his legs to left field. After the ball passes, R2 has to push the third baseman out of the way to get to third. I called obstruction (and got no argument from any one). Next, the runner rounds third and heads for home. The left fielder throws home and because of the obstruction the play is close. As the catcher receives the ball at home plate the runner plows him over. I called malicious contact and ejected the runner (again no argument from any one). Question: Does the run count? I awarded the run because the obstruction happened at a base prior to the malicious contact and, in my judgment, the obstruction prevented the runner from scoring. I understand if the two violations occur together the malicious contact supersedes the obstruction, but does that apply when the two acts occur at different places and times?

For help we turned to Dennis Meadows, the high school baseball rules interpreter for Arizona: “In this case the plays are taken in the order that they happened. So award home on the obstruction, score the run and eject for malicious contact.”

This is wrong isnt it? If MC occurs before runner scoring, ball is immediately dead and that runner is out and ejected...therefore no run could hypothetically score right?

That seems to me like he is giving an NFHS interp.

[DG]

Originally Posted by Toadman15241

That seems to me like he is giving an NFHS interp.

I was a bit surprised that Legion would be playing FED rules also, but under FED I believe MC supersedes obstruction and no run should score in this situation.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by DG

I was a bit surprised that Legion would be playing FED rules also, .

"Legion" doesn't.