Runner dives over catcher on tag play

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

You are in denial. The runner dove over the fielder. The video is not grainy.

Does the FED rule even say that diving is only specifically illegal if the runner dives over a fielder.......from what I'm reading some might be confused with a head first slide.

Granted diving is something you don't see everyday.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Does the FED rule even say that diving is only specifically illegal if the runner dives over a fielder.......from what I'm reading some might be confused with a head first slide.

Granted diving is something you don't see everyday.

It says: "Diving over a fielder is illegal." Maybe the PU judged it was a head-first airborne slide over a fielder. There is no mention of that in the rules.

[justanotherump]

Bluehair, thanks for pointing that out. Been a while since I worked FED, and had to go through the rulebook. I did find a casebook play where a runner is obstructed and then dives over the fielder. The ruling is that the runner is out immediately. So there is no instance where a runner dives over a fielder that he isn't out.

[bluehair]

Play 1: An inaccurate throw that takes F2 into, what was an unobtructed, path of R3 to HP. Sprinting R3 has 2 choices, run through F2 or avoid colliding with F2.

Play 2: F2 has the ball, goes down to knees anticipating R3's slide attempt to score. R3 has choices among which is to dive, jump, hurdle the stationary F2.

I think the action of F2 does impact my use of 8-4-2b. The decision to D/J/H F2 in play 2 is what 8-4-2b was written for (IMO). The decision to avoid a collision in play 1 is righteous baseball (IMO).

For me, it comes down to did R3 D/J/H or did R3 avoid a collision. It is not both. Some umpires will see a D/J/H, others will see a collision avoidance. It is a judgement call (not black or white).

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by bluehair

For me, it comes down to did R3 D/J/H or did R3 avoid a collision. It is not both.

If R3 dove over a fielder to avoid a collision, he's out.

[RPatrino]

Runners D/H/J over fielders to a) avoid a collision and b) avoid a tag. Should this affect your ruling on the play?

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Runners D/H/J over fielders to a) avoid a collision and b) avoid a tag. Should this affect your ruling on the play?

The premse of the question states that runner did D/H/J over fielder. What more is there to judge.

If you want to take away the D/H/J premise, then tell me more about what F2 was doing at the time of (a) ...(b) is probably an out.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

If R3 dove over a fielder to avoid a collision, he's out.

I think what is mucking things up here, is the fact that the Russian judge over gave the player a 3 for the dive therfore, for many it is not fully defined as a Dive.

Also, why does avoiding a collision give a runner a waiver on violating another part of the rules.

Listen, I see a picture of a HP umpire wearing one Ball Bag, setting up in the wrong position for a play at the plate, and making what appears to me as an erroneous call in a Championship game for which his experience did not appear to be commensurate with the level of play. Just my opinon of course and I could be wrong but, I still agree with you Dash.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Listen, I see a picture of a HP umpire wearing one Ball Bag, ...

There are certain things that are unquestionably unprofessional as a plate umpire, like wearing your cap backwards or having any of your equipment on the outside of your apparel.

You consider having one ball bag unprofessional? To me, that's just a matter of taste and necessity.

Hell, in HS baseball around here - it would be pointless to saddle yourself with two ball bags. Just how many baseballs are you dealing with in your area? I'm lucky if I have as many as three balls in my bag at any one time. And usually, that only lasts until the first foul ball. Much more frequently it is 2 or less. Often, I have to wave my bag limply and say, "We're out of baseballs here, coach!" I can't imagine what I'd do with another bag flapping around.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by bluehair

Play 1: An inaccurate throw that takes F2 into, what was an unobtructed, path of R3 to HP. Sprinting R3 has 2 choices, run through F2 or avoid colliding with F2.

But that would not be an illegal collision or malicious contact. There are many times when contact occurs (even violent contact) that is just a "train wreck".

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by CT1

But that would not be an illegal collision or malicious contact. There are many times when contact occurs (even violent contact) that is just a "train wreck".

The unavoidable train wreck was not one of the options. The choices in play 1 were to avoid the train wreck (as done in this play) or participate in the train wreck.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by bluehair

The unavoidable train wreck was not one of the options. The choices in play 1 were to avoid the train wreck (as done in this play) or participate in the train wreck.

That was the players choice. Once made, then it was the umpires choice in determining what if any, rule violation might have occured and if so penalize accordingly or not, and make the call.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bluehair

The unavoidable train wreck was not one of the options. The choices in play 1 were to avoid the train wreck (as done in this play) or participate in the train wreck.

the runner needs to ATTEMPT (does not need to be successful) to LEGALLY AVOID (diving is not legal) the collision.

If the runner dove to avoid the collision, you should thank him for his sporting play and then call him out.