Ejection without an out?

[jmkupka]

R1 coming home, F2 three feet up the 3B line, not holding the ball (not in the act of receiving it either, but that's irrelevant).
R1 attempts to go through F2, laying her out, then contacts home plate.
I have an USC and an ejection, but do I have an out?
There was no play being attempted by F2 (8.7.Q).
There was an OBS, but this isn't a subsequent INT that would take precedence over the OBS.
Bottom line, does the run score?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

R1 coming home, F2 three feet up the 3B line, not holding the ball (not in the act of receiving it either, but that's irrelevant).
R1 attempts to go through F2, laying her out, then contacts home plate.
I have an USC and an ejection, but do I have an out?
There was no play being attempted by F2 (8.7.Q).
There was an OBS, but this isn't a subsequent INT that would take precedence over the OBS.
Bottom line, does the run score?

It's an ejection for USC, certainly. If R1 did not commit an act of INT, you can't call the out unless she missed the plate (and the defense properly appeals).

I understand where you're going with this, and I personally feel that a runner committing this kind of a flagrant act should not be allowed to score. However, that is not the rule, and despite my strong distaste for such an act, I must allow the run to score.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

There was no play being attempted by F2 (8.7.Q).
There was an OBS, but this isn't a subsequent INT that would take precedence over the OBS.
Bottom line, does the run score?

No play = nothing to interfer with! You are right that if an obstructed runner subsequently interfers, the interference penalty takes precedence. But this isn't interference under ASA rules.

Score the run, then eject at the end of the play.

The reason that the runner is out for doing this same thing when the fielder has the ball and is waiting to make a tag is that, in that case, the fielder's action likely prevented an out from being made. Same with other runner interference calls where a play (ie: opportunity to make an out) is disrupted. The penalty gives the defense what they likely would have gotten anyway, minus the interference.

With no play being made, we don't reward the defense with an out they wouldn't have gotten. We give the offense what they would have got anyway, the run, then punish the unsportsmanlike act.

Ignore all this if you're playing high school ball! Their rules tell us to call the ball dead, the runner out, then eject the runner if the contact is malicious.

[Snocatzdad]

How is this not DMC (dumb move catcher) for standing in the base path with no play on?

I didn't see in your post that the runner altered course to cause collision, simply that given the fact that she was obstructed she chose a direct path to the base through the fielder as opposed to altering course.

I see this all the time with F3 not giving up 1B on an extra base hit and runner has to muscle through the player and bag. Is it USC to take the path you would have taken without the OBS???

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by Snocatzdad

Is it USC to take the path you would have taken without the OBS???

That is the judgment that the umpire has to make!

Simply trying to reach the base and making some contact with an obstructing defender isn't in itself illegal. Purposely "laying out the fielder", acting with flagrant intent to injure or harm another player, excessively crashing into a fielder when avoidance is a viable option- those all go beyond the scope of "just trying to reach the base".

All contact is not created equally and all contact is not illegal contact!

Back to the OP. The poster stated that the runner tried to go through the catcher, laid her out and the he had unsportsmanlike conduct. That is his (the umpire's) judgment to make. So, I didn't really take his question as being, "Is this unsportsmanlike?". He apparently has already judged that the runner's actions were. He was asking about the penalization and scoring of the run. That answer lies in the playing rules, not the individual umpire's judgment or discretion.

[Tex]

In NFHS, malicious contact supersedes obstruction (8-6-14)

The ball is dead and the runner is out. Each other runner must return to the last base touched at the time of interference. The runner is also ejected. The batter-runner is awarded first base. Since the runner is out, the run cannot score.

[greymule]

In Fed, if the runner touches the plate and then immediately creams the catcher, is that still an out and no run?

[Tex]

Per 3-6-18 Penalty: Play is dead immediately, offender is out unless she has scored, offender is ejected, all other runners returned to the last base touched at time of malicious contact.