Ejection for Sliding too Far from Base?

[Manny A]

The NCAA rulebook recently added a new rule under 12.13 about collisions, and it deals with a runner who slides too far away from the base where she cannot reach it, solely for the purpose of trying to affect the fielder's throw for a double play. I don't have a problem with the rule itself. The runner should demonstrate that the slide is close enough to the bag that her intent was to touch it.

I'm just a little disconcerted by the Effect of that rule violation. It calls for the sliding runner to be ruled out and ejected under the Behavioral Ejection rule. Isn't the ejection part of it a little too extreme? Seems to me if the slide was perfectly legal in terms of having her legs near the ground, she doesn't come up with a forearm shiver, etc., why should this be considered a flagrant act?

I would've thought on this play that the sliding runner is simply called for interference with intent to break up a double play, so both the runner and the preceding runner (most likely the BR) are ruled out. Or if that runner is already out, then the runner closest to home is ruled out. But why eject her if she really didn't do anything flagrant?

[BlueDevilRef]

I can only assume it's a stiff penalty in hopes of keeping players from doing it in first place. A bit of, if overly punitive, rules language/preventative officiating. Problem is, we all know it will keep some from making that ruling.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Manny A

But why eject her if she really didn't do anything flagrant?

I believe that the rationale for this rule and its effect is that the Rules Committee considers sliding at a fielder with no chance to reach the base a flagrant unsporting act, thus worthy of ejection.