The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 02, 2009, 03:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by CajunNewBlue View Post
I am currently looking for it in the current one.... I know ive read it in one of the following... 2009 baseball rules or caseplays... 2008 baseball rules or caseplays or rules by topic. but perhaps i pulled this one out of my butt from the FED or NCAA softball rules (i know its baseball, but dang, if its MC for the girls im calling it for the boys). its in one of them.
Malicious contact requires excessive force and/or intent to injure - any maybe avoidable contact. Too many people are judging any contact as malicious.
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 02, 2009, 03:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LA
Posts: 642
hrmmm.... hard to not say "intentional" when practice after practice they are taught/instructed to run and touch the bag.... then they don't put into play what they practice... i judge that as intentional. ie: they know to run and touch the bag and chose NOT to do that....if he had stumbled, or had been bumped or had pressure from a foul side throw.. maybe not intentional..... but, that's just me.
__________________
Will Rogers must not have ever officiated in Louisiana.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 02, 2009, 04:15pm
Stop staring at me swan.
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,974
I saw it one time two years ago and one time last year. I have gotten to the point where I am considering ejecting the next player at the high school varsity level and above because the more I think about it, I was pretty fast back in the day and attempted bunt singles many, many times and not one time did I ever come near F3's foot. I guess I'm having a hard time seeing it as accidental upon further review.
__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 02, 2009, 04:32pm
Stop staring at me swan.
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,974
I skimmed through the case book and the 2009 Rules by Topic and didn't see this rule...but I did skim through the books...
__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 03, 2009, 06:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,577
A coach's perspective

Some teams think the bag is in the base path and the runner is entitled to run through the bag. I saw the same batter run into F3 on two seperate occasions. The first time, he successfully manages to seperate F3 from the ball. The second time, he was out. I couldn't read intent, but I warned him to avoid contact with the fielder. His coach thought I shouldn't have said anything about it.
__________________
SAump

Last edited by SAump; Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 08:52pm.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 08:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LA
Posts: 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAump View Post
Some teams think the bag is in the base path and the runner is entitled to run through the bag. I saw the same batter run into F3 on two seperate occasions. The first time, he successfully manages to seperate F3 from the ball. The second time, he was out. I couldn't read intent, but I warned him to avoid contact with the fielder. His coach thought I shouldn't have said anything about it.
Why wouldn't they be allowed/entitled to run thru the bag? if F3 blocks the bag and only gives them the very outside/foul side of first i might be inclined to call OBS (if the runner changes direction or is impeded)..ohh wait this is baseball...never mind
__________________
Will Rogers must not have ever officiated in Louisiana.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 08:56am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAump View Post
Some teams think the bag is in the base path and the runner is entitled to run through the bag.
I agree with "some teams." I have no idea what transpired in your plays, or what this has to do with the OP.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 05, 2009, 09:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,577
Rule is not so orange and white

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
I agree with "some teams." I have no idea what transpired in your plays, or what this has to do with the OP.
In both situations, F3 did not do anything, in my best judgment, to warrant collision with B/R. Everyone in "my" play knew the runner would be out at 1B. I never saw a B/R collide with F3 on consecutive plays. I didn't know he would be running into F3 again. Did the B/R know this? I don't know. But I felt that he may have purposely run into F3 in an effort to dislodge the ball because of the previous play. I had to say something to him and his coach came out to defend his player for running through the bag. Considering player safety is a situational thing. I agree with the umpire's actions in the OP. The situation does not excuse a B/R for haphazardly running through a bag. It was the right thing to do.
__________________
SAump

Last edited by SAump; Fri Mar 06, 2009 at 12:22am.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Fri Mar 06, 2009, 08:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAump View Post
In both situations, F3 did not do anything, in my best judgment, to warrant collision with B/R.
As I read the play (and it's hard to do), BR ran through the bag and then collided with F3. So, F3 was (approximately) on the foul line toward right field? WTF was he doing there? While being there doesn't "warrant" a collision, it sure puts him in jeopardy of one.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 05, 2009, 08:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,577
Refer to OP

Quote:
I then called Time and told runners to return to 2B & 3B and allowed the HC to attend to F3. Prior to returning to game play the Offensive HC wanted an explanation of why I called Time and did not let runs score (he was ‘loosing’ by a lot of runs).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives View Post
Malicious contact requires excessive force and/or intent to injure - any maybe avoidable contact. Too many people are judging any contact as malicious.
Can or should this contact between F3 and B/R be considered interference, if not malicious contact? No runs would have scored in a 2 out situation as a result of the 3rd out made at 1B. The judgment made to determine interference is based on whether or not other baserunners would have chosen to advance had F3 not fallen to the ground, and for no other cause. Interference in this situation would also immediately kill the play and not require an "injury" time out. The closest rules I could find relate to 5.1.1.e {et al.}.
__________________
SAump

Last edited by SAump; Fri Mar 06, 2009 at 12:11am.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 05, 2009, 09:57pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives View Post
Malicious contact requires excessive force and/or intent to injure - any maybe avoidable contact. Too many people are judging any contact as malicious.
Going on the fair side of the bag for no apparent reason is a malicious act. And I like to let guys play the game. But that's the kind of chickens--t bush move that must result in an ejection for more than one key reason, including preventing a retaliatory act.

I am not looking for ejections, but that would be one of them.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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
Time Out for Injury nukewhistle Basketball 15 Thu Dec 14, 2006 02:30pm
Injury/time out TriggerMN Basketball 4 Mon Jan 02, 2006 09:01am
Time out for Blood/Injury Blackhawk357 Basketball 11 Fri Dec 24, 2004 12:23pm
Injury Time Out umpguy2190 Baseball 2 Mon Apr 19, 2004 06:20pm
When is it time to call Time / Dead ball? Deion Softball 1 Tue Jul 01, 2003 11:50am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:47pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1