Disqualified ?
 

Can a player be disqualified for malicious contact ?

Force play at home. Runner is out by 3 or 4 steps. She continues on. Then tries to slide but slides late and we have a collision. The collision wasn't bad but there was a collision. My partner then disqualifies the runner.

I was under the impression that "malicious contact" was an ejection.

Is the only difference between a DQ and ejection where the player can be for the rest of the game ? I.E., in the dugout versus in the parking lot ?

ASA rules.. this is an ejection.

Its common practice in our area to allow players to stay on then bench for stuff like this. Not sure up where you are.

Speaking ASA.

The rules require an ejected team member to leave the grounds and have no contact with the team or umpire. 4.8.B

I was under the impression that "malicious contact" was an ejection




I guess the hard part was, " Was this Malicious"

And if they are only playing with nine and no subs or 10 with the dp/flex and the ejection was not the dp or flex you now have a forfeit. Have seen this happen a couple of times.

I was trying to figure out when is it a DQ versus an ejection....

The contact was more then it should have been but not malicious......

Its either malicious and an ejection or its not. You dont DQ or eject a player because it was "almost malicious".

I know that, thanks. :rolleyes:

Agreed....
 

I would agree with you. Lets just say my partner was a little....high strung.:cool:

I agree, even though the rule says ejection, leave the area, I am reluctant to order a girl to leave the area unescorted. We usually do a bench restriction.

We don't. There's always a lockerroom or canteen where the ejected player can go. Last month however, I ejected a player for her big mouth. I was under the impression that she left the field. I didn't hear, nor see her. After the game I was informed that she actualy stayed in the dug out...

Ejection over attitude is different than malicious contact. Attitude sitting on the bench is a cancer that can cause trouble. I've made them leave the park. Ejection over malicious contact.. typically they are at least pretending to be sorry and dont cause trouble and know what they did. I dont get teary eyed over malicious contact or injuries or potential injuries. I simply eject them because that is the rule. I dont remember anyone ever getting ejected for killing me when I was catcher... but hey, thats the rule, so I eject them and look the other way if when they walk into the dugout.

I wish I had that luxury when calling SP. The guys can't shut up before they're ejected, while they're being ejected, and most certainly NOT after being ejected. ;)

Actually, this year has been a quiet year for me. Only one toss, and it had nothing to do with me or my calls.

Coaches and male fp/sp players.. gotta go. No hanging around. Girls, maybe I just dont notice it.. all FP players look alike and are named carlie or kaylie, so how the heck do I know who it is?

In a league or friendly, that is an administrative decision and the umpire can follow their direction.

Other than that, as an umpire, it isn't your call.

Well, if I toss someone and they go quietly, I'll continue the game without much delay. I know ASA says you're to wait until an ejected player is gone, but if a player shrugs, says, "yeah, you're right. Sorry, guys," I'm not going to stare him down all the way to the parking lot.

In fact, one game, I tossed a guy for violating Mike's favorite "no profanity" rule. Hey, local rules, not mine. He kept quiet all the way to the dugout, changed his shoes quickly and quietly, and started out the dugout to the parking lot. I signal "play ball," but my BU starts yelling, "no, sir, you do not!" This BU has been known to be a bit of a hot-head, and the players didn't care much for him. As I'm walking towards my partner to tell him, "hey, he's going quietly, there's no need for this," the ejected player now realizes that he's being singled out and starts tossing a bunch of profanity in the direction of my BU, all the way out to the parking lot. Frankly, my partner deserved it (and I don't say that very often).

Yes, procedures are procedures, but sometimes, a little professional discretion is justifiable.

We all know the written ASA rule and I'm not sure why you keep restating it.

NUS and my UIC will allow benching. I'm sure you know NUS allows benching in practice for girls, because they have said it in every clinic where I have heard it brought up. In fact, in my area they are even trying to put it in the bylaws (something I vehemently oppose and will be voting and have argued against).

There are times when the black and white written rule is not what is exactly taught at clinics or whats done in practice, and ejection/leave the park vs benching a minor is one of them.

Well, ejecting a minor out of the park carries numerous other issues with it, such as the fact that the player IS a minor and, in this society, would require a chaperone with her in the parking lot.

You also don't have the same complications from a minor getting ejected as you do with an adult. Most minors just slump on the bench, but an adult wants to give you a piece of his mind.

I have no problems with letting the minor sit on the bench, so long as they do so quietly and under the control of the coach. If they get out of control (such as calling the umpire a "mother f..." - it happened last week to an umpire I know), then that's a different matter.

At the NUS I went to in February, this issue was not brought up, but each instructor has his/her own list of discussions.

Did someone take your partners parking space?:D

Nah, Ol' Bill's got his own handicapped parking space. :D

Just kidding. I know where he puts the keys to his truck, and I've been waiting for the right moment to move his truck on him.

Actually, the only ejection I've had so far was for USC. He taunted the other team a little too much, so I gave him a warning. Next inning, his team made a great play, so he started yelling at the opponent his teammate had tagged out, "yeah, that's right! You're out, pal! Get going! Left! Right! Left! Right! Left! Right!"

Yeah, that did it for him. :)

Unless you are talking about school ball, this is not the umpire's concern or responsiblity. Every minor child on a summer / rec / travel team has a coach and a parent. Dealing with the care of the child away from the field is their responsibility, not the umpire's.

Mind you, I don't have a problem with ejection but stay in the area (even in the dugout) if the player is not a further disruption, but the above is NOT a reason the umpire should be concerned with. Eject the player as normal. The rest is up to the coaches / parents.

Please cite the post in which I "restated" the rule?

Actually, I've never heard that from the NUS. Unlike Dave's partner, I'm not hovering over an ejected player and marching him/her out of the park. However, I am going to expect them to leave.

I'm sure there are some who may believe this to be callous, you need to remember that we are there to umpire a ball game, not to babysit and give timeouts to misbehaving children. That is the coach's job.

Have you ever seen a JO team during championship play that was not accompanied by a bevy of adults? The parents have already agreed to abide by the ASA rules when they signed the roster. Having an available adult to attend to the ejected player shouldn't be an issue.

Have you ever ejected a JO player that did not deserve it? Do you not let things go from JO players that you wouldn't hesitate to dump an adult player because you try not to eject them?

Then there is the embarassment factor which may actually help control the player and team. It could also teach a few kids a lesson about on field behavior.

No argument, but it is often that "black and white written rule" that CYA when an issue arises. You may find this hard to believe :rolleyes: , but I used to be that "nice guy" that would let this go or ignore that. Being a nice guy only works when those involved get their way. Been burned too many times and just will not be the "nice guy" any longer.

True that.... it does not work for sure.

Hear, hear! I've been also disapointed one too many times...

I wasn't saying I was concerned about it. I just said it's another issue. I didn't say it was MY issue. ;)