| WestMichBlue |
Thu May 18, 2006 01:04pm |
Quote:
Originally Posted by greymule
If the ASA rulesmakers mean simply contact, they should use a word other than crash. Perhaps contact would be a good choice. I agree that an attempt to slow down, avoid, soften the impact, etc., gets the benefit of the doubt.
deliberately, with great force, crashes into the defensive player
This was indeed the old rule. As I remember, ASA removed deliberately because such a judgment required the umpire to divine what was in the runner's mind. They removed with great force as redundant, since crash implies great force.
|
ASA uses the word crash; NFHS now uses illegal contact. But - my point is - what are you going to call if the runner makes contact - whether it is crash, or smash, or collide, or bump, or whatever. You are going to call the runner out for interference, not matter what word you use to describe the contact.
In addition - IF you judge the contact (or crash or smash or collide) to be a flagrant act, then you will also eject the runner.
But crash alone does not warrant ejection. Nor, in the NFHS book, does illegal contact warrant ejection.
I agree with you that the word crash implies contact more violent than just a minor bump. Perhaps ASA should follow the NFHS change and take crash out in favor of illegal contact. This helps differientate between contact that warrants an out call, and that which justifies ejection.
WMB |
