Dixie 13-15. But interested in opinions on all, especially ASA since I call some there too.

R3, passed ball. Ball hits backstop and rolls toward 3B dugout. Pitcher comes in, straddling baseline, at least 2 yards in front of the plate. Runner collides straight up with pitcher at about the time the catcher picked up the ball. Your call?

I'll wait for the results to tell you my call and the coach's possibly valid (but eventually discarded) complaint.

Not sure I have enough info here, but I'll give it a shot. If the runner deliberately ran into the pitcher with malicious force, I'm calling her out and ejecting her. If the force was mild and no malicious intent (in my opinion of course) let it go and play ball. I'm sure the coach will talk to the pitcher about where to stand. Since the pitcher didn't have the ball, you could call obstruction in Fed and ASA. However, the intent is what it all hinges on. If the runner meant to knock her down or back, it overrides the obstruction and she's out and gone.

Speaking ASA.

If "colliding straight up" means the runner could have, but made no effort to avoid the collision, she is ruled out and ejected.

If there was no time because the pitcher just jumped in front of her, it is obstruction, score the run.

Mike, with the way the new rule is written that a defensive player must have the ball in order to be in the runner's path, does the runner still have the obligation to go around the defender in this situation? The way I read the rule and read this situation, it's obstruction all the way. Speaking ASA of course.

It does not make a defender without the ball fair game. Dumb move on behalf of the defender, yes; right to be used as a tackling dummy, no. All players have an obligation to avoid a collision, if possible.

There is no rule forbidding a defender from being in the runner's path. The rule forbids impeding the progress of a runner without the ball.

I called her out and ejected for malicious contact. She didn't lower her shoulder, but from what I saw (I was watching runner and pitcher, not the ball), she had time to avoid.

Coach claims she was watching the ball and didn't see the pitcher until it was too late to avoid. And with the pitcher that far up the line it was certainly to early to slide and still make it to the base. I settled him down with "MUST SLIDE OR AVOID" - she failed to do either. I also told him if she'd made ANY effort to get around the pitcher, I'd have called obstruction.

This was a strange game. We had the first ejection of the year, the first obstruction call of the year (same pitcher), the first interference call of the year (R2 collided with SS making a play with bases loaded) for this agegroup (this group's 4th or 5th game) and a girl called out for throwing her bat - and they were all called against the same team. This same team won, by run rule. Coach (I've known for a few years) was civil throughout all the calls, mostly getting on his players for them. Also had a ground ball that went about 3 inches in front of the plate and stopped in the soft sand where no one ran. Catcher picked up the ball and accidentally tagged the runner. Again - "against" the same team.

The coach needs to understand that it is HIS job to watch the ball, not the runners.

I'll bet none of us could count how many times we've heard, "Don't look at the ball, look at me" in our lifetime.

Mike - Help me out with a rule cite here (ASA). I don't have the book here at work or I would research myself.

My first thought was to penalize the obstruction, award home, then eject the runner due to the malicious contact. What am I missing here that would declare the runner out?

WHY ? The fielder didn't have the ball.

Come on!
 

That is the very point. Intentional collisions are absolutely unacceptable - they must be avoided. Independent of where the ball is, or if the defense has it or anything about the ball...

Collisions should be avoided as reasonable. PERIOD.

Intentionally running into someone is never, never, never acceptable. I don't understand why some of us are not understanding this SIMPLE safety rule.

You must be watching too many collisions on TV baseball games. Intentional collisions are not allowed.

what is the significance of this play, that is, why would the connotation be "accidently" tagging the runner isn't that what a catcher would want to do?

She, as well as the batter, didn't realize the ball was even in play. She is left handed, luckily (for her). She picked it up, and her hand hit the batter's left shoulder as she was getting ready to throw back to the pitcher. That's what I mean by accidental.

Like I said - VERY sloppy game.

As for the contact - she can't just crash into the player, even if the player is illegally in the baseline. This was not, in my opinion, accidental.

Not according to Mr. Pollard. Even though his vision finished 17th in the Derby, I have to assume his mind is just fine :)

There is a case book play (Section 10, not sure of play number).

I intend to submit a rule change in November specifically addressing this issue.



[Edited by IRISHMAFIA on May 5th, 2004 at 04:48 PM]

DTTB , If it was malicious I wouldn't argue. If the ump just says "must slide or avoid " I would like to know why, when the fielder does not have the ball. I agree with the final call. I wasn't real clear on the reason given to the coach. Brian

Age 13 - 15 REC ball. I don't see this at intentional at all. I see young and/or inexperienced players focusing on getting home, not sure whether to slide or not; see's no play so stays upright. Probably didn't even "see" the pitcher.

For us, as adults, to look into the mind of a teenage girl and say "Oh, you did that deliberately," or "You had plenty of time to avoid the collision" and eject them from the game is wrong, IMO. I've spent too many years coaching this age group, in both REC ball and H.S. JV teams and I know how these girls do, and do not, react to game situations.

Varsity ball, or 16U TB, definately make the call. However, note that NFHS does support the obstructed runner making some contact with the fielder. Casebook 8.4.3.SIT D: F2, without the ball and with no chance to catch the ball, is blocking home plate. R1 pushes F2, but not flagrantly, out of the base path and touches home plate. RULING: Obstuction."

WMB