The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 04, 2004, 04:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
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.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 04, 2004, 05:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 541
Send a message via AIM to TexBlue
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.
__________________
Rick
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 04, 2004, 05:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,560
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
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.
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.

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 04, 2004, 07:00pm
Ref Ump Welsch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
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.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 04, 2004, 08:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,560
Quote:
Originally posted by Ref Ump Welsch
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.

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 09:01am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
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.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 09:36am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,560
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder

Coach claims she was watching the ball and didn't see the pitcher until it was too late to avoid.
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.

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 10:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
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.
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 - 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?

__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important!
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 11:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 112
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
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.
I settled him down with "MUST SLIDE OR AVOID" - she failed to do either.
WHY ? The fielder didn't have the ball.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 11:51am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,474
Angry Come on!

Quote:
Originally posted by bethsdad
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
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.
I settled him down with "MUST SLIDE OR AVOID" - she failed to do either.
WHY ? The fielder didn't have the ball.
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.
__________________
"There are no superstar calls. We don't root for certain teams. We don't cheat. But sometimes we just miss calls." - Joe Crawford
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 12:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 480
Question

Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
... 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.
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?
__________________
"We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done."
Chris Z.
Detroit/SE Michigan
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 01:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
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.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 01:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,560
Quote:
Originally posted by Andy
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
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.
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 - 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?

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]
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 01:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 112
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
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 05, 2004, 02:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: West Michigan
Posts: 964
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
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:55pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1