Illegal slide--FED rules

[Publius]

R1 stealing, F2 drops pitch.

R1 safe without a play, but makes (minor) contact beyond the base with F6, who is just standing there.

R1 out, or nothing? I said to the complaining coach that there was no play, so nothing, but I'm not 100% sure I was right. By rule I seem to be, but since FED has a penchant for case plays and rulings contrary to the rule book, as well as a hyper-propensity for "safety", I'm never sure if I missed something.

Anyone?

[UmpJM]

Publius,

You should have told the complaining coach he was right - there was contact beyond the base. Then call obstruction, and put the runner on 3B.

Sorry, just dreamin'... On to your question.

Did the runner slide or go in standing up?

JM

[Publius]

Slid. and ended up with knees on top of the bag.

Had there been a play, I would have called him out for the illegal slide. The rule, as I recall it, refers to an out for a runner sliding illegally and making contact with a fielder in the immediate act of making a play.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Publius

Slid. and ended up with knees on top of the bag.

Had there been a play, I would have called him out for the illegal slide. The rule, as I recall it, refers to an out for a runner sliding illegally and making contact with a fielder in the immediate act of making a play.

The exact language of 8-4-2 is: "does not legally slide and causes illegal contact and/or illegally alters the actions of a fielder in the immediate act of making a play."

The "illegally alters the actions" clause gives us a lot of leeway.

[UmpJM]

I concur with mbyron. I got "nothing" on this - and the complaining coach is starting to get me pissed off.

JM

[pastordoug]

This seems to have gotten a lot of attention so let me add something to the mix..... First I agree that on the OP I've got nothing. Now, according to the FED rule. it seems like if a legal slide was made and that legal slide does not illegally alter the actions of the fielder contact beyond the bag should not be called as INT.... The only issue I see is a runner sliding "completly" past the bag causing contact which IMO could prevent a play on runner.... But I am seeing players come hard into the bag sliding past the bag but not beyond. I remembering seeing a discusion along these lines before....

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by pastordoug

Now, according to the FED rule. it seems like if a legal slide was made and that legal slide does not illegally alter the actions of the fielder contact beyond the bag should not be called as INT.... The only issue I see is a runner sliding "completly" past the bag causing contact which IMO could prevent a play on runner.... But I am seeing players come hard into the bag sliding past the bag but not beyond. I remembering seeing a discusion along these lines before....

If the runner slides beyond the base and makes contact with the fielder, it is, by definition, an illegal slide. Altering of the play is not required for there to be a violation.

I don't see a difference between "past" and "beyond" the bag. If the runner's foot goes beyond the bag, that is enough to make the slide illegal, assuming there is subsequent contact or altering of the play.

[pastordoug]

Let me try this: According to FED they define a "legal slide" as..... (don't have my book handy) This portion of the rules (OP) deal with an "illegal slide" which uses the word "and/or". IMO if there is a "legal" slide that does not alter the play, even with contact past the bag (by this I mean still within distance of touching bag as opposed to beyond) no INT..... Sliding past in and of itself doesn't define illegal? I'll look up the definition when I get home unless someone post before....

[billken]

No play, no foul...unless the contact was malicious...then you have an ejection on the runner.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by pastordoug

Let me try this: According to FED they define a "legal slide" as..... (don't have my book handy) This portion of the rules (OP) deal with an "illegal slide" which uses the word "and/or". IMO if there is a "legal" slide that does not alter the play, even with contact past the bag (by this I mean still within distance of touching bag as opposed to beyond) no INT..... Sliding past in and of itself doesn't define illegal? I'll look up the definition when I get home unless someone post before....

Parsing your sentences is a bit like wading through jello. But yes, sliding past the bag and making contact is in itself an illegal slide. But illegal slides are penalized only if they affect a play.

[pastordoug]

Ok..... I was wrong. FED 2-32-2c says sliding beyond and makes contact OR alters the play of fielder it is an illegal slide..... OUT. How many have called this when the slide didn't have any impact on the play? Did you get any flack from coach?

[Publius]

Originally Posted by pastordoug

Ok..... I was wrong. FED 2-32-2c says sliding beyond and makes contact OR alters the play of fielder it is an illegal slide..... OUT.

Actually, it just defines an illegal slide; it says nothing about an out.

8-4-2-b, as previously mentioned, defines when an out is called for the illegal slide. On a steal, it requires a player in the immediate act of making a play. The OP didn't have that. As I said earlier, if it had, I would have called the out.

I was, and am, with JM and mbyron--I was just wondering if there is some FEDLANDIA interp superseding the rule, as there seemingly so often is.

In this case, it appears not.

[pastordoug]

Dask Rock said quote: "If the runner slides beyond the base and makes contact with the fielder, it is, by definition, an illegal slide. Altering of the play is not required for there to be a violation."

The rule as I stated says if the runner slides beyond the base and makes contact (does not require a play) then the runner is OUT.

You said quote: "Had there been a play, I would have called him out for the illegal slide."

I was just wondering how many have called OUT for contact with NO PLAY...

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by pastordoug

Dask Rock said quote: "If the runner slides beyond the base and makes contact with the fielder, it is, by definition, an illegal slide. Altering of the play is not required for there to be a violation."

The rule as I stated says if the runner slides beyond the base and makes contact (does not require a play) then the runner is OUT.

You said quote: "Had there been a play, I would have called him out for the illegal slide."

I was just wondering how many have called OUT for contact with NO PLAY...

You cited 2-32-2c, which defines an illegal slide. That rule does NOT say that the runner who commits an illegal slide is out. You added that.

For penalties you need to look at the interference rule, and there's no interference without a play to be interfered with.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by pastordoug

Dask Rock said quote: "If the runner slides beyond the base and makes contact with the fielder, it is, by definition, an illegal slide. Altering of the play is not required for there to be a violation."

The rule as I stated says if the runner slides beyond the base and makes contact (does not require a play) then the runner is OUT.

You said quote: "Had there been a play, I would have called him out for the illegal slide."

I was just wondering how many have called OUT for contact with NO PLAY...

No one.

R1 stealing, F2 doesn't handle the pitch and has to chase it. There is no throw to 2nd. R1 slides past the bag and gently contacts F6. Are you going to call R1 out for interference?