Whatcha got?
 

NCAA rules:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaIlQg-PqMA&authuser=0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5b5vhbMiRo&authuser=0

I like the post script ... "And you can go with her!"

For starters, this is NOT obstruction in NCAA.

Why not?

The catcher didnt exactly leave the runner anywhere to go. She was well up the line and drifting further into foul territory. It does look like the runner was attempting to go around but the catcher moved into her path.

Soooo... obstruction? no obstruction?

Cannot tell. I agree that the catcher moved into the basepath, however, at least from my view, don't know if the "about to receive" standard was met for the catcher to be where she was.

However, I would like to know what rule was enforced to call the runner out.

An answer will be forthcoming..I promise.

Assume no obstruction call on the play.

This appears to be the rule covering your situation if you had ruled it obstruction. Still looking for references to a collision without obstruction.

12.13.1 A defensive player shall not block the base, plate or baseline without
possession of the ball or not in the immediate act of catching the ball.
EFFECT—Delayed dead ball is signaled. Obstruction is called and the
runner is declared safe. Each runner must return to the last
base legally touched at the time of the infraction. Exception: If
the runner collides flagrantly, the ball is dead, and although the
runner is declared safe on the obstruction call, she is ejected.
(Behavioral ejection)

The only reference I can find to calling the out is if the runner crashes a fielder in posession of the ball waiting to make a tag.

The heck it isn't. This absolutely is obstruction in any ruleset I've worked, even NCAA. "About to receive" in NCAA is not met (imho).

That said, I agree with the ejection. It was obstruction ... and then it was malicious contact. Not sure why the inning ended though, unless the umpire ruled no obstruction.

I heard in the video the PU call it an out. I think that is why you heard "are you kidding" repeated.

What am I not seeing? :confused:
It looks like the catcher made a catch before the collision?

Well, if there is no obstruction, then 12.13.1 doesn't apply. If there had been obstruction, then a Safe call on the runner plus the ejection due to a flagrant collision would be the appropriate decision.

12.13.2 also doesn't apply since the catcher did not have possession of the ball and was waiting to make a tag.

If this were a case where the runner is not doing something flagrant, then it would be a no call, as Approved Ruling 12.13.3.2 points out. Since the PU ejected this runner, he judged the collision flagrant.

Frankly, I'm surprised there isn't an NCAA rule that covers a flagrant collision when the fielder is not in possession of the ball, but is also not obstructing. I suppose he could eject the runner just in general for unsporting behavior. But there is nothing supporting the out call.

Bottom line: I'm confused by the out and ejection call. I think the PU screwed the pooch on this one.

That would be under 12.8 Runner is Out....specifically 12.8.10

No she didn't. Immediately after the collision, the ball continues in the same direction. If the catcher had caught it, the ball would have gone a different direction.