Holiday Slide - Legal or Not?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Here are the Guidelines under 6.3 Willful And Deliberate Interference:

In sliding to a base, the runner should be able to reach the base with his hand or foot.

A runner who, in the judgment of the umpire, contacts or attempts to make contact with a fielder with a slide or roll block that is not a bona fide effort to reach and stay on the base may be called out for interference and, when appropriate, a double play may be called.

Any definite change in direction by the runner to contact the fielder would be considered interference.

If a runner hits the dirt, slides and rolls, it does not constitute a rolling block unless the runner leaves his feet and makes contact with the fielder before the runner slides on the ground. If the initial contact is with the fielder instead of the ground for the purpose of breaking up a double play, it is a roll block.

Explain why he did not violate the underlined part.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by Rich

Why? Why would you, the umpire, allow yourself to be angry at all?

I work small college and HS varsity and an ejection would never even cross my mind. His intent isn't to injure -- it's to break up the double play. It's a FPSR violation and I'm getting 2 outs, but it's nothing more in my mind.

I agree, emotions have little to do with this. If your employer and the rules you officiate by allow this to happen, (whether it was good or bad, viscious or not), then you are paid to enforce accordingly.

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by Rich

Why? Why would you, the umpire, allow yourself to be angry at all?

I work small college and HS varsity and an ejection would never even cross my mind. His intent isn't to injure -- it's to break up the double play. It's a FPSR violation and I'm getting 2 outs, but it's nothing more in my mind.

Because I think it should be illegal.

Maybe it's the mom in me.

Rita

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by Manny A

If Holliday had executed the exact same slide with Scutaro on either side of the bag, and Holliday could reach the bag with his hand, nobody would say a peep. The same is true had Scutaro been in front (first base side) of the base. So why should it be any different on the back side of the base?

The only anomaly, if you will, is that Holliday started his slide on top of the bag, not in front or to the side. But nothing in OBR makes that illegal. Heck, he could've started a slide after he passed over the bag, and as long as he could reach back and touch the bag with his hand while sliding, he meets the rule requirement.

Yeah, there's no doubt what he was intending on doing. And if Scutaro had leaped over Holliday, or even gotten up right away after the contact, there would have been no outcries. But because Scutaro got hurt, people want to scream "ILLEGAL!" especially Giants fans who still have the Posey incident fresh in their memories.

No there isn't an intent to hurt anyone. But that means nothing. Because, if nothing else, they are relying on the fear of getting hurt to break up the double play.

Rita

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by jicecone

I agree, emotions have little to do with this. If your employer and the rules you officiate by allow this to happen, (whether it was good or bad, viscious or not), then you are paid to enforce accordingly.

And I would, if I were officiating there.

Doesn't mean I would have to like it.

And my emotions are for me here in my easy chair at my laptop.

Rita

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Rita C

And I would, if I were officiating there.

Doesn't mean I would have to like it.

And my emotions are for me here in my easy chair at my laptop.

Rita

My question to you is: Why would you care?

I don't tend to like or dislike things like this. I just call it the way I'm told.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Explain why he did not violate the underlined part.

That explanation would be two sentences you didn't underline (the last two).

It was (MLB) borderline, I'll give you that.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Dakota

A runner who, in the judgment of the umpire, contacts or attempts to make contact with a fielder with a slide or roll block that is not a bona fide effort to reach and stay on the base may be called out for interference and, when appropriate, a double play may be called.

Explain why he did not violate the underlined part.

IMHO, pro runners violate the underlined part all the time. What really gets violated is the part I highlighted in red. They'll hook-slide away from the base, are able to reach the base with the hand, but make no attempt at staying on. Perhaps they're given the benefit of the doubt that they tried to stay on but their momentum carried them past it.

Regardless, they are rarely called out for doing what you've underlined when it's a more routine take-out slide (left or right side of the base). This slide was not so routine because it took place on top of and then beyond the base.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

You are correct, I saw the dash (excuse the pun) and thought FED.

I wasn't aware illegal slide was in rule 2.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

I wasn't aware illegal slide was in rule 2.

The numbering convention in the MLBUM has nothing to do with the OBR numbers.

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by Rich

My question to you is: Why would you care?

I don't tend to like or dislike things like this. I just call it the way I'm told.

Because I'm not like you, Rich.

Rita

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Manny A

IMHO, pro runners violate the underlined part all the time. What really gets violated is the part I highlighted in red. They'll hook-slide away from the base, are able to reach the base with the hand, but make no attempt at staying on. Perhaps they're given the benefit of the doubt that they tried to stay on but their momentum carried them past it.

Regardless, they are rarely called out for doing what you've underlined when it's a more routine take-out slide (left or right side of the base). This slide was not so routine because it took place on top of and then beyond the base.

The part you put in red is only applicable on a roll block.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rita C

In the games I do, there would be two outs and an ejection.

Rita

Originally Posted by Rita C

Because I think it should be illegal.

Maybe it's the mom in me.

Rita

I'm a little confused by this. In what leagues is this an ejection? Or, is it an ejection only because you think it should be illegal? (and to be clear, I'm asking sincereely -- to seek clarification. Not in any accusatory sense.)

I agree it's two outs in FED and NCAA (and probably most other leagues that have adopted some sort of FPSR).

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I'm a little confused by this. In what leagues is this an ejection? Or, is it an ejection only because you think it should be illegal? (and to be clear, I'm asking sincereely -- to seek clarification. Not in any accusatory sense.)

I agree it's two outs in FED and NCAA (and probably most other leagues that have adopted some sort of FPSR).

I can see this being considered malicious contact in FED.

[johnnyg08]

I don't think this would be considered malicious in FED. In FED, I'd have a FPSR violation.