Inattentive Runner - Collision

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

In OBR interference with a throw has to be intentional.

While that is true, interfering with a fielder who is "in the act of fielding" a fair batted ball, which includes the fielder's attempt to throw out a runner immediately after gaining control of the batted ball, does NOT require intent.

If the fielder was attempting to tag the runner who collided with him, I agree with UmpTT - it's nothing. If the fielder was attempting to throw to another fielder in order to retire a runner, it IS interference on the colliding runner.

JM

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by Sven K

...fielder is rising up to make the tag the runner plows into him.

If this was in fact during a tag, without Malicious contact, I've got nothing (OBR).
Ball control maintained = runner out
Ball dislodged = runner safe...until another defensive player picks up the ball and tags him.

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Sven K

and as the fielder is rising up to make the tag the runner plows into him.

First things first.

Others are quoting OBR rule references BUT most leagues that are OBR based, ie: Legion, USSSA, Babe Ruth / Ripken/ etc. have an MC or a Collission rule.

You say "runner plows" Generally speaking when a runner "plows" into another IS a form of MC. Yes there can be collissions that are not malicious but as mentioned in general terms when someone "plows into" another is an intent to injure. Obviously we would HTBT to see EXACTLY what transpired but I am going STRICTLY by your wording.

The call is

1. TIME
2. That's MC
3. R2 is out and I am also taking the out at first as well
4. R2 is ejecetd

Pete Booth

[rbmartin]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;682512]

The call is

1. TIME
2. That's MC
3. R2 is out and I am also taking the out at first as well
4. R2 is ejecetd

The OP said the runner was "oblivious of the play developing in front of him".
How can you have MC? You could have HUYAC (head up your #$@ contact).

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

The OP said the runner was "oblivious of the play developing in front of him".
How can you have MC? You could have HUYAC (head up your #$@ contact).

Every time someone mentions contact Pete starts a MC lecture.

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

How can the runner be "oblivious of the play RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM" UNLESS we are talking about TEE ball or "rug-rat" players which is a "horse of a different color"?

As an official I see F5 and then I see R2 "plowing into him" How do I know or interpret this action as "being oblivious"? Generally speaking when a runner "plows into" a fielder the purpose is to dislodge the ball from said player which is a form of MC.

Pete Booth

[MrUmpire]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;682523]

... dislodge the ball from said player which is a form of MC.

Pete Booth

Not under all rule codes.

[Rich Ives]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;682523]

How can the runner be "oblivious of the play RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM" UNLESS we are talking about TEE ball or "rug-rat" players which is a "horse of a different color"?

As an official I see F5 and then I see R2 "plowing into him" How do I know or interpret this action as "being oblivious"? Generally speaking when a runner "plows into" a fielder the purpose is to dislodge the ball from said player which is a form of MC.

Pete Booth

You obviously haven't spent nearly enough time in 12U rec ball. Oblivion is a standard state of mind at that level.

To go on, you assume way too much in terms of intent. There don't seem to be any accidents in your world, and it always sems to be the runner's fault.

How about this grown-up play:

Runner heading home. He looks back over his shoulder to see if the ball is coming (not supposed to but they do anyhow). Catcher steps into the runner's path. Runner runs into him full tilt.

Who, if anyone, is at fault? Is it MC or just a train wreck?

[MD Longhorn]

Pete, I don't know how you can assume intent at all when it's pretty much specifically excluded by the original poster...