Double protest on same call.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

If this play happened in a rule set where protests are allowed...how would this be handled.

One or no outs. Play at the plate, defense catcher jumps in the way of R1 last second resulting in a crash. Runner touches plate and subsequent runner R2 crosses the plate. After play, U1 rules R1 out for not sliding. Offense protests R1 fulfilled obligation to attempt avoid contact and there's no rule requiring a slide. Defense protests that R2 and R3 who is now on third should be returned last bases at time of the crash

I will answer based on a league I work and the rules within that league, including protests.

the league does require the players "to slide of give themselves up to avoid contact with a player making a play on them."

To me, the OP seems to imply that the catcher does not have the ball at the time she "jumps in the way of R1." At this point, we now have an obstruction call. Since there is a violation by the defense (obstruction), in which the defense is not making a play on the runner (can't make a play on a runner if you don't have the ball), the rule requiring a slide or giving themselves up does not apply.

In this case, when the umpire ruled the runner out for not sliding, he has misapplied the rule. A protest on such call would be upheld, the run would be allowed to score and all subsequent action would be legal as well.

Since the appeal appeal by the offense is upheld, and the runner is not declared out, the appeal by the defense regarding positioning of the runner is moot.

One other thing the league rules do state is regarding the required slide being interference or not.

The key part is along these lines. "If a player does not slide or give themselves up and causes significant contact with a defensive player making a play on them, he or she shall be ruled out and ejected. In the judgment of the umpire, if the contact prevents the defense from making a play on another runner, the runner who created the contact shall be called out for interference (and ejected) and the ball shall be ruled dead. If the contact does not prevent the defense from making a play on another runner, the ball shall remain live."

The reason for this is that it puts the judgment of the umpire into play. The umpire has to judge if there was a potential play on another runner. This also brings in a key part of the league rules. Judgment calls by an umpire are not protestable.

A final part of the rule states that a player is ejected for violating this rule. I have had this come up once. A girl absolutely plowed over the catcher trying to score. This was a clear case of malicious contact no matter the league rule or not. I had to apply both the league rule (out and ejection), and the sanctioning body rule for malicious contact (ejection). The run did not count, the girl was ejected, and both coaches were happy I made the call.

The girl had apparently done that previously and wasn't called out for it. I was the first umpire to actually make the call, which her coaches were happy of because they had warned her several times to stop running into the catcher on play at the plate.