The sheer number of videos we’ve received this spring from concerned parents and coaches confirms for us that Malicious Contact isn’t being called consistently at any level of baseball (this isn’t confined to just High School).
With that said, this play will challenge any level of umpire. Some things to consider when watching this video:
- Look at where the throw takes the catcher – does this cause the catcher to move into the path of R2?
- Does R2 have any option BUT to run over F2?
- Could contact have been avoided?
- Was the contact malicious in nature?
- Could this have been obstruction? What about interference?
- Was the catcher “in the act of receiving the baseball”? (when you comment on this please make sure you identify the level of baseball you’re working)
- What would you do (if anything at all) after seeing R2 jump up “looking for a fight”?
- Anyone penalizing F1?
- Anyone getting an ejection? More than one?
And the bonus question: The Umpire’s Timing is fantastic…did he get the call right?
Discuss…
***The Playoffs are Coming!***
Starting in the month of May we’ll be focusing most of our videos on preparing you for 3 & 4 man mechanics. We’ve got over 50 videos ready to go so Members will be seeing an average of almost 2 new mechanics videos each day. To sign up visit here. If you’re a Chapter President, we have discounts available for entire Chapters. Email me directly by writing to [jd at umphub dot com] for more information.
I specifically chose this still shot from the video as the thumbnail. Does that look like a runner who’s getting himself ready to slide?
No MC, throw takes the catcher to contact across the path of the runner. Runner does not touch the plate. Pitcher gets the ball and tags runner for the out. Runner does not appear to lower shoulder or attempt to maliciously take out catcher. There is no must slide rule in NFHS. Runner did not have the opportunity to avoid the catcher.
On positioning….. Umpire moved toward third initially. First move with runners in scoring position is straight back from the point of the plate and then a read step if needed. This umpire appeared to go to third base line extended immediately. Throw was just a little off line. Umpire appeared to be a little blocked. Play could have been seen clearly from the point of the plate on this one.
Now all the swelling up and shoving after the play is another issue. I did not see the catcher push the runner or the pitcher shove the runner. The runner is tagged by the pitcher and he then runner shoves the pitcher.
Anytime there is a train wreck like this, get in there and try to clear one of the players out to avoid escalation. If you cannot and a fight ensues, get out of the way and write down numbers.
I would have an out when the pitcher tags the runner. Might have an ejection on the runner for the shove if I couldn’t get between them and he continued aggression.
The new PBUC Mechanic is to go straight to 3BLX every time. Had he done that would he have seen this play any differently?
USSSA – Tag play evident a runner must slide or seek to avoid contact.
Runner always out, ejection up to umpire.
I have a tag play evident, no avoidance by the runner, and the actions after the play influencing my decision in the direction of an ejection. (aka – if I wasn’t ejecting for the MC, I am for the pushing)
Great comment John – thanks for referencing your USSSA affiliation. It’s great to hear from different perspectives.
From the USSSA perspective:
I’m not sure that I agree a tag play is evident. Might argue that the catcher has to have possession of the ball before saying a tag play is evident.
For USSSA, I say train wreck all the way. No obstruction or MC or need to slide/avoid contact.
Not sure who tagged who or who touched what and when so I’m staying away from safe/out.
Not too concerned about the pushing as long as it’s broken up pretty quickly.
USSSA is OBR modified. Using the definition of obstruction (and the comment that follows). I am understanding a tag play is evident when a fielder is in the act of fielding a ball for the purpose of applying a tag.
From OBR rule 2.00 Obstruction comment: “…about to receive a thrown ball and if the ball is in
flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the ball he may be considered “in the act of fielding a ball.”
Now had the ball already passed well beyond the catcher, I could see it being obstruction, but as USSSA states, MC supersedes obstruction. It’s a safety rule. It gives advantage to the defense in the promotion of safety.
I think a much better definition of “tag play is evident” is needed.
I am a high school umpire.
1. poor positioning by HP ump
2.eject runner for MC, plus a written report concerning the push after the play
3. runner is called out
That’s how I see the play
In FED based on the rules this would be one of two things, it would either be OBS or MC. Train wreck is not an option. In NCAA starting with the 2011-12 rules book, this would be considered a flagrant collision due to contact above the waist by the runner on a fielder who is in the act of making a play. The correct call would be interference on the runner and the runner would be called out. In NCAA they are stressing that if contact cannot be avoided it should be below the waist. If the runner slides and contacts the catcher below the waist, the contact is deemed legal.
I think more umpires are starting to use the “train-wreck” defense as an out for making a tough call. Both rule sets FED, and NCAA spell out in their rule books how this type of play should be handled, and train wreck is not an option. In FED if the catcher does not have the ball, and contact with the runner occurs, it is OBS. The only thing that can trump OBS in FED in this situation is if the runner initiates MC. If there is MC then the runner is out and ejected. FED does not give any provisions for the fielder to be “in the act of fielding a throw” like the NCAA does. FED is cut and dry, no ball, it’s OBS. In NCAA, contact is allowed as long as it is not flagrant and initiated below the catcher’s waist. The NCAA gives its umpires more decision making ability because it spells out what type of contact is legal (NCAA Rule: 8-7) and it identifies what is required to have a fielder considered as “in the act of fielding a throw” (NCAA Rule: 2-54 art.1) for the purpose of determining Type 1 obstruction.
So what do you think – was it Obstruction or MC? You never really told us what you’d call
So there is no incidental contact in FED baseball? There are many collisions in high school baseball. There are many cases where you have nothing.
Personally, I will not reward the defense for a bad throw or in this case, poor positioning by the catcher. The runner here does not show malice, he simply raises his hands to protect himself. The catcher is trying to do his job, though poorly.
I still have play on.
#! YES
#2 YES
#3 NO
#4 YES
#5 NO
#6 YES
#7 Eject R2 warn F1 & F2
#8 warning
#9 R2
What you all failed to realize is the catcher was already blocking the plate before the ball started towards the catcher which in no league can you do. The catcher in fact only tried to reach for the ball putting himself in a bad position. The only league in which you need to slide to avoid a collusion is little league. So in that case I actually would call Interference on the catcher. All he did was reach for the ball. He never moved off of the plate which was never coming towards the plate to begin with. The runner never actually dropped his shoulder so no MC should be called. As far as the rest of the shenanigans I would step in and say thats enough warn everyone to get back to the dead ball areas and if people don’t comply now I’m tossing.
I’m umpiring my first game (American Legion 13-19) on Monday and this makes me nervous! I would say its obstruction. The Catcher should have identified that the throw was off line and got himself in position to field it while allowing the runner to continue on the path. Defintley not MC the catcher made a last minute lunge for the ball, no way for the runner to anticipate that, all he is doing is making the best of the situation to not get hurt since he is ill equipped to handle the contact unlike the greedy catcher or should have realized there would be no play with the off line throw from LF. Runner is safe. I would immediately put myself in the middle and issue firm warnings with my finger on the eject button.
I heard someone say its MC because it would have to be contact below the waste, but with the catcher in such a low position that is an impossible request considering the circumstances.
Just my thoughts.
I dump the runner for the shove after but not for MC; it looked to me like he was trying to protect himself – elbows and arms in against body, shoulder never lowered. Catcher is clearly obstructing as he never does have possession of the ball and he reaches with his arm across the 3rd baseline which really initiates the contact, i probably get the catcher for whatever he says that caused the runner to shove him – you can tell he was running his mouth about something.
You have a safe baserunner at the plate. The runner never ducked his shoulder into the catcher, but simply defended his body. The catcher came across the plate, into the baserunners established basepath.