Another how to handle it
 

Ok, had this in a HS JV Tourney Saturday.

I'm the base umpire.

R1 on 2nd, R3 on 1st. B3 hits to deep RF for a base hit. R1 scores. Throw comes in to the catcher while R2 is halfway between 3b and home. She catches it and establishes a position holding the ball blocking tjhe plate, about 2 feet in front of the plate.

R2 keeps running and the very last second appears to start a very late slide directly into the catcher. The feet are not up, but she makes very hard contact with the catcher, which knocks the catcher backwards. As she falls backward, the ball rolls out of the glove. The plate umpire calls the runner safe.

The defensive coach has flames coming out his ears as he come out of the bench area. The plate umpire believes the runner attempted to slide and slide into the catcher. Obviously the coach disagrees.

I didn't even have time to come in to protect the plate umpire because B3 is having words with the SS who obstructed her as she rounded 2b. I need to make sure this doesn't escalate.

My personal opinion is the contact at the plate was intentional and should have been ruled illegal and possibly malicious.

What should I do different in this based on my position as the base umpire on a potentally dangerous play at the plate?

Luckily nobody was hurt.

The play at the plate is the plate umpire's call. If I'm the base umpire I'm going to wait and if my partner asks what I saw I'll offer my view of it. Otherwise I'm going to keep it to myself.

To add to Seth's spot on answer, I'll add that this would be in my post game discussion with my partner.

You should do just what you did.

I know it's HS not ASA and without seeing the play it's tough but it sounds like the runner did NOT remain upright and crash into a fielder with the ball. Sounds like the plate Ump may have got the call right....I have a legal run in ASA!

Based on your description alone (and not seeing it), I have a run as well.

You mentioned that you "didn't have time to protect the plate umpire" - assuming it was just one coach, there was no need for you to do so. Your job in this sitch is to keep any 2nd coach from approaching him.

PS - "The defensive coach has flames coming out his ears as he come out of the bench area." - as PU, I'm ejecting before he says a damn word, and THIS coach is never getting "I think she tried to slide" out of me. The next one, if calm, might.

So the catcher lost possession of the ball due to her 'falling backwards' (iow: falling to the ground) and not from the hard slide, and tag?

From the angle I had, the catcher never lost possession of the ball until she fell backward and hit the ground, which was a result of the contact with the offensive player. The tag was applied, and the contact caused the catcher to fall backward, and when the catcher fell back the ball came out as her body, and glove hit the ground.

Granted here that your BU and not PU, and he has a better view of the entire play (hopefully, considering you have other responsibilities here)... but if PU saw EXACTLY what you just described, I have an out. No Malicious contact and no ejection ... just an out on the tag.

But from his angle, he is in position to really know whether the catcher maintained possession during the tag. If not - and the ball was dislodged during the tag, and not (as you saw from 100 feet away) on the fall - his ruling was correct.

The fielder must maintain possession of the ball whenever they go to the ground. Whether it be from laying out to make a catch or from a hard slide like you explained.

No. Laying out to make a catch... absolutely. On a tag, absolutely not - once the tag is made and the ball is secure at the moment of that tag, future actions are irrelevant - the player is out before the player starts stumbling to the ground.

My problem with the entire play was the amount of contact that occurred on the play, and the lateness of the slide attempt. The PU even admitted the slide was very very late. One of the things I heard from the irate coach was somewhat appropriate, "what about protecting the catcher."

From my angle I don't have malicious contact, but I would have called it an out for the level of contact. I might be biased however because my best friend in HS broke her ankle on a very similar play at the plate when runner did a very late slide. That injury may have cost her a chance to play collegel ball as well.

I truly hate to bash you on two simultaneous threads... but you continue to demonstrate that to you the rulebook is a guide, rather than a set of rules. Find a clinic, a mentor, whatever. Don't make stuff up to suit your personal set of desires on the field.

While you're at it... find us all the rule that says, "4.1.3 B - If the base umpire doesn't like the "level of contact" he may call an out, especially if a former friend of his hurt her ankle in a similar play." Luckily for those of us who actually care to check - the rulebook spells this out for us. If you have malicious contact (key word: MALICE), call an out. But to say flat out that you DON'T have malicious contact, but are going to call an out anyway??? Again, you do the entire profession a disservice.

You may want to rethink this.

And why would that be???

the thought process that 'possession' must be maintained from hitting the ground (as compared to maintaining possession from the hard slide) If the 'contact from the slide' did not make the defense lose possession of the ball' then you have an out. Even though the movements after the tag was applied and the contact with the ground caused the defense to lose possession.

So, the first baseman fields a ground ball far to her right. She turns and races to the white bag and tags it. Her momentum carries her forward and she collides with the batter-runner as she crosses the orange bag. The collision causes the first baseman to fall to the ground and drop the ball out of her glove.

It sounds to me as if you would call the BR safe here. That would be wrong. In fact, it would be wrong to call the BR safe if the collision causes the first baseman to drop the ball even before she hit the ground.

As others have said, catches and tags are treated differently when it comes to releases of the ball.

Okay on a play like this their is an exception since the fielder was never given the chance to release the ball due to the collision after the force out.

I will agree to disagree with you. in this type of play the fielder must maintain control of the ball after hitting the ground.

That's isn't right. As noted, the moment the player takes possession of the ball, the forced runner is out. There is no "continuation" or "finishing" of the play required.

you are mis-applying the requirements for a legal tag then. The impetus of the fielder losing control/possession of the ball while applying a tag must come from the offensive player and their slide, not from the after effect of that contact/slide. there is no requirement for the 'continuation' or subsequent actions by the fielder. (whether under control or not)

Rule cite please? I see no exception in the book that reads anything at all like this. From what rule or rule exception do you derive this opinion?

IB

The concept of "voluntary release" where a fielder must hold on to the ball when falling to the ground or running into a fence or teammate has to do with determining if a legal catch has been made.

Outfielder catches fly ball on the run takes three more strides and collides with teammate or fence and ball comes loose. No catch.

This would apply to a thrown ball as well. Ground ball to F5 playing deep. F5 makes long throw to F3 that F3 has to stretch for. F3 catches ball in time with toe touching bag then falls to ground and the impact with the ground dislodges the ball. BR safe because F3 did not complete the catch of the thrown ball.

But this concept does not carry over into tagging a player with the ball. The fielder is already in possession of the ball, there is no catch to complete. So long as she maintains possession of the ball during the tag what happens afterward does not matter. Assuming the runner is off base and in jeopardy its a legal tag and the runner is out.

Interesting discussion on catch/no catch. A good place to start is the definitions.

"A catch is a legally caught ball, which occurs when the fielder catches a batted, pitched or thrown ball with the hand(s) or glove/mitt." Notice that batted, pitched or thrown ball are all grouped together. That implies there is no difference in how to rule on a catch / not catch.

"It is not a catch if a fielder...falls to the ground and drops the ball (implying that it was originally securely held) as a result of the collision or falling to the ground."

And catch/no catch has nothing to do with whether a ball is possessed at the time of a tag or after a collision. These are two different animals.

Considering voluntary release after a tag, collision, and fall is just as out of place as it would be in this situation:

High fly to CF is caught, apparently. R1, seeing no one covering 2nd makes a break... CF, seeing the same thing also makes a break for it. They collide near 2nd base and the ball rolls free.

No catch? Batter runner now safe?

No, of course not.

The same applies to a tag play that has a collision the fielder must maintain possession of the ball.

No Batter Runner out as possession was maintained after the catch and the tag play would constitute a separate play by CF. R1 would be safe as CF did not maintain possession of the ball after the collision.

Way too much supposition and cross-rule application.

Speaking ASA

Voluntary release is not required at any time if the umpire has determined the fielder had demonstrated possession of the ball.

On a tag, if the umpire determines the player has possession of the ball at the time of the tag, the runner would be out if the situation called for that ruling.

When touching a base for the purpose of effecting a force out, putting the BR out at 1B or on a live ball appeal, if the umpire determines the player has possession of the ball at the time that player contacts the base, the runner would be out if the situation called for that ruling.

On a catch, the defender must hold the ball in his/her hands and/or glove long enough to demonstrate control and/or the ability to voluntarily release the ball.

AT NO POINT is the defender required to "complete" a tag or play in order for an out to be called.

First, I really don't give a rats tail end about your opinion. Now maybe you should read the rulebook, specifically the rules 8-6-13.

8-6-13 The runner does not slide legally and causes illegal contact and/or illegally alters the actions of a fielder making an immediate play on her. Runners are never required to slide, but if they slide the slide shall be legal.

Then refer to rule 2-52-1 A legal slide may be either head first or feet first. If a runner slides feet first, at least one leg and buttock must be on the ground. If the runner slides, the runner the runners hands or feet must be within the reach of the base when the slide is completed.


The key part of this is at least one leg and buttock MUST be in contact with the ground. The runner had not gotten to the ground when the contact with the catcher occured.

Now as for your assinine comments about my opinion. I persoanlly have a major problem with people who think they are the only person who knows anything about anything. You are acting EXACLY LIKE that person. You do not know me, you have never met me, but tyou sure seem to think you know all about me and my level of training. I don't pretend to know everything, but based on your comments I should just kiss your a$$ because you are the only person who knows everything about every rule in the book.

I don't know your level of experience, but I have talked to several umpires I know, including several that work high level college ball, as well as HS. They seem to agree based on the discussion that the runner should have been called out even if the contact was not malicious.

If you feel you need to change the story around to make the situation match your opinion... fine. You said nothing about an illegal slide. You said you wanted to rule them out because the contact was too hard and an old friend of yours hurt their leg in a slide that was too hard. Which is idiocy. If the slide was illegal - it's a completely different situation. By all means, rule them out for sliding illegally. Do NOT rule them out because you didn't like the level of contact (your words, sir).

I don't know you. I can only base my opinion of you on your own statements. You (in multiple threads) stated you wanted to make rulings because of your own personal feelings of fairness. That kind of umpire has no business on the field, and only makes matters more difficult for the real umpires that follow you.

No need to kiss my backside - personal kudos from you will do nothing for me. You DO need to crack open a rulebook - I base this solely on your own erroneous statements about what proper rulings should be.

I don't know everything - I participate here to learn. You should too. Especially if you can be cured of your desire to be that umpire the rest of us constantly have to clean up after.

Time for you two to take it offline. :(
This forum as no room for or acceptance of personal insults. :(

Speaking of th legality of the tag.
 

The legal definition of a tag reads that the the ball is not considered to be held securely if it jugged or dropped after the touching, unless the runner deliberately knocks the ball from the fielders hand.

For NFHS, maybe, not ASA, ISF or NCAA. NFHS doesn't define a "tag", it defines a "tag out" ;)

Then again, it is somewhat ambiguous since there is no time frame or particular action provided to determine when the tag out becomes legal.

Sorry, meant Tag out. The problem is it doesn't specify the time frame. I think this is where common sense should prevail, but .....

Common sense prevails when you just call the out when you determine the player had secure possession of the ball when applying the tag which is what the rule requires

If contact between the runner and the glove being used to make the tag causes the ball to dislodge, you have no tag.

If contact between the runner and the PLAYER making the tag causes the ball to dislodge (and assuming this contact occurred after the tag was made), you have a legal completed tag. Ditto contact post-tag between the fielder and the ground or something else.

Key is securely held. If a player looses possession of the ball while executing the tag, s/he obviously wasn't holding the ball securely. If the player makes the tag while the umpire has determined the ball was securely held and then the ball comes loose, it is a tag.

There is no requirement to pull the ball away or "complete" a tag for it to be valid and/or legal, whatever.