Would you eject, #2?

[jkumpire]

Like the creme colored shirts, and that is garden variety malicious contact. R3 hits the road. Quickly.

[bigjohn]

What if catcher didn't have the ball, obstruction, do you still eject #3??????

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

What if catcher didn't have the ball, obstruction, do you still eject #3??????

Yes. Malicious contact supersedes obstruction.

[bigjohn]

NFHS Forum: Is this malicious?

go tell these guys Welpe!

[asdf]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

NFHS Forum: Is this malicious?

go tell these guys Welpe!

Go back to the other board, troll.

[asdf]

Anyone see the nice job of removing the mask by the PU in the sequence following the obvious ejection?

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE=scarolinablue;676605]

.

Are you CERTAIN they played by FED rules?


In watching the video neither the player or F2 said anything to one another which is a good thing. Normally when something like that happens both players would "get into it" but that type of play on the surface seems "normal" in this league.

The DC did not come out screaming / yelling

The PU did not call an infraction either.

Perhaps they were playing by OBR rules because in FED the player would be declared OUT.

Pete Booth

[bigjohn]

A. National Federation Baseball/Softball Rules will be used in all games.

http://www.schsl.org/2009/09-10%20AAA%20%20Handbook.pdf

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

NFHS Forum: Is this malicious?

go tell these guys Welpe!

Atl Blue and Bob have it right. I'm not going to go fight your (misguided) battles for you.

[bigjohn]

So you have changed you opinion based on what those guys say?

Welpe: Oh yeah. That's an easy one. Gone.

AB said:

I assume you are referring to the play that starts at about the :35 mark.

If so, no. There was no intent to injure.

[Welpe]

I didn't read down far enough to see his comments about the video. I don't agree with him on the video but I agree with him, Bob and everybody else on that thread telling you what they are. That's about all I have to say about that.

[bigjohn]

Why would you toss the kid in the video then?

[scarolinablue]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;676851]

Originally Posted by scarolinablue

Are you CERTAIN they played by FED rules?


In watching the video neither the player or F2 said anything to one another which is a good thing. Normally when something like that happens both players would "get into it" but that type of play on the surface seems "normal" in this league.

The DC did not come out screaming / yelling

The PU did not call an infraction either.

Perhaps they were playing by OBR rules because in FED the player would be declared OUT.

Pete Booth

Yes, it was a playoff game under NFHS rules. I cannot explain why the runner was not EJ'd. He was called out. Other than the MC and ejection which were not declared, what infraction was there? Interference by R3, upon which he is declared out, which he was anyway?

The DC was probably happy his kid held onto the ball. I can't explain why he didn't ask for the MC or EJ.

[bigjohn]

Catcher or runner? Your post is confusing. SC

I like the USSSA rule

8.04.C Whenever a tag play is evident, a runner must slide or seek to avoid contact with the fielder and / or catcher.
Attempting to jump, leap, or dive over the fielder and / or catcher is not interpreted as seeking to avoid contact.
Malicious contact shall supersede all obstruction penalties.
Rule 8.04.C Penalty: The runner shall be called out and may be ejected from the game at the umpire’s discretion.
Rule 8.04.C Comment: When enforcing this rule, the umpire should judge the runner’s intent. If the umpire feels
that the contact was unintentional, then the runner should only be declared out. If the umpire feels that the contact
was intentional and / or malicious, then the runner should be declared out and ejected.