Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
Sign in to follow this  
Mudisfun

MC ejection tonight that did not need to happen

Recommended Posts

FED rules

2 out, top of 6th. Run down ensues between 3rd and home. As F2 throws to 3rd, R3 changes direction towards home. F2 being too close and back peddling is close to losing his balance and going ass over tea kettle. His being in the way obstructs R3, which I immediately point to and verbalize loudly, "that's obstruction". It is at this point where R3 lowers his shoulder and creates contact with F2. F2 of course is put even farther off balance and goes to the ground. Immediately I indicate and verbalize 'that's malicious contact', kill the play, call the runner out, and since we are 8-10 feet up the 3rd base line from home no run scores. I then ejected him from the contest.

Coach of course was not happy... they drove so far, spent so much time on the roads, the sky is falling, etc, etc....

To me, this is the EJ that need not happen. With R3 having obstruction in hand, I cannot understand why he continued into F2 and dropped the shoulder. His action cost the go ahead run and stretched the game into extra innings. They eventually won, but not for another 45-50 minutes.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
8 hours ago, Mudisfun said:

Coach of course was not happy... they drove so far, spent so much time on the roads, the sky is falling, etc, etc...

Should've spent some of that road time teaching base runners not to be idiots/a-holes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pardon the war story: I had a runner truck a catcher (rather more obviously with intent, lining him up, etc.). After I tossed him, his coach came out to see if the opposing player was OK. The runner had gone back to the dugout, and he said to me, "I wish he'd hit people that hard on the football field. He's our starting middle linebacker!"

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mudisfun said:

To me, this is the EJ that need not happen. With R3 having obstruction in hand, I cannot understand why he continued into F2 and dropped the shoulder. His action cost the go ahead run and stretched the game into extra innings. They eventually won, but not for another 45-50 minutes.

Not unexpectedly, R3 clearly has little to no knowledge of the rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in FED an ejection is immediate?  If I am not mistaken in OBR the ejection wouldn't have been enforced until after the play.  enforce the obstruction, enforce the ejection.  Score the run end the game and write your report. 

Or am I way off base here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, renegadewolf said:

So in FED an ejection is immediate?  If I am not mistaken in OBR the ejection wouldn't have been enforced until after the play.  enforce the obstruction, enforce the ejection.  Score the run end the game and write your report. 

Or am I way off base here?

I may be wrong, but the way I would have done it is:

- Call OBS

- Upon MC, call time

- Award home

- EJ the runner

There is no out to be had here. You can't impose one as a penalty in this scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NFHS MC supersedes obstruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I’m with @ElkOil and @renegadewolf on this one... the MC occurred clearly after the OBS, and thus, takes its own penalty – an ejection – after the OBS award of home plate.

Consider other examples of MC... say a rundown happens, and F5 chases R2 back to 2B. He tags, then knocks down, and then intentionally stomps on (a now Out) R2 on the ground. Does that erase the Out, and R2 awarded 3B or replaced upon 2nd? No. The tag is still valid, the Runner is out, but F5 is Ejected for MC.

Another is a pickoff attempt of R1 at 1B. After repeated attempts, and getting slap-tagged each time, R1 dives back in as F3 slaps a tag on him, regardless of the ball actually trickling away. But R1 has had enough, leaps up, and decks F3. Do we have an Out? No... how can we? The ball is lying five to six feet away and R1 is on the bag. But we do have MC, an Ejection, and OT will need a substitution to replace the R1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cav said:

NFHS MC supersedes obstruction.

Yeah, I don’t see how this isn’t correct. There’s a case play in the book that’s almost this exact situation. Does it literally have to be simultaneous for something to supersede? I.e. running the catcher standing a foot in front of home plate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cav said:

NFHS MC supersedes obstruction.

So what would you have here? When the MC occurs, call time and EJ the runner? Then what? You don't have an out, and you can't put a replacement runner on 3B.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have MC, immediate dead ball, R3 is out #3 and EJ'd, OBS superseded, no run, we move into the bottom of the 5th inning, make some notes on the card, ask VHC for the sub's name, tell F1 and the ODB, "Two more."

NFHS 2-21-1, 3-3-1m Penalty, 5-1-1e, 8-2-9, 8-4-2e, 9-5-2 Exception 5 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Hkepuck said:

Yeah, I don’t see how this isn’t correct. There’s a case play in the book that’s almost this exact situation. Does it literally have to be simultaneous for something to supersede? I.e. running the catcher standing a foot in front of home plate. 

There is indeed a goofy FED ruling in the ballpark of this play, but not quite this one.

What's missing from the discussion so far is that when R3 trucks F2, it is not only MC but also INT (that's what Cav's reference to 2-21-1 says). That, not the MC, is what makes the ball dead immediately, warrants calling an out, and sends other runners back.

By rule (8-4-2e), MC always supersedes OBS. Any obstructed runner who subsequently commits MC will be denied his awarded base(s), ruled out, and ejected at the end of playing action. 

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, maven said:

There is indeed a goofy FED ruling in the ballpark of this play, but not quite this one.

What's missing from the discussion so far is that when R3 trucks F2, it is not only MC but also INT (that's what Cav's reference to 2-21-1 says). That, not the MC, is what makes the ball dead immediately, warrants calling an out, and sends other runners back.

By rule (8-4-2e), MC always supersedes OBS. Any obstructed runner who subsequently commits MC will be denied his awarded base(s), ruled out, and ejected at the end of playing action. 

You had me until the INT. Now I’m confused. You had obstruction and MC. How do you also have interference on the runner?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hkepuck said:

You had me until the INT. Now I’m confused. You had obstruction and MC. How do you also have interference on the runner?  

Ah, by citing the rule and explaining it, @maven clarified that MC, committed by the offense is a form of Interference. And that it supersedes Obstruction. Runners are charged, above all else in Fed, with “avoiding contact”. That, despite Obstruction presenting itself or occurring, the onus is on the Runner to reduce or avoid contact.

This is why great latitude should be given to amateur players who “weave through traffic” provided there isn’t a play being made upon them. I’ve actually been told of, and witnessed, umpires calling kids out for not running a direct line from base to base while the rest of the participants are standing, watching the ball in the outfield; or, conversely, calling a BR-kid out for running around F1 or F3 trying to catch a pop-up in proximity to the 1BL. Not for interference, but for not interfering.

No wonder our job is so hard. We have to overcome idiocy in our own ranks.

So, back to OBS-MC-INT... With OBS “called” in his favor (initially), that doesn’t give R3 a “free pass” to committ MC. His act of MC upon the Fielder, in this case, eclipses the OBS and since Interference brings with it an immediate Dead Ball, someone is going to be Out (in this case, the Runner). Any coach that contests this can be countered with, “Yeah, Roger, but he didn’t have to hit/truck/knock him flat. He has to avoid contact, and that collision we just saw wasn’t brought to him.”

This situation is a great example as to why we also have to recognize – and call – Obstruction (at the plate, especially) when it presents itself. Because Runners are charged with avoiding contact, they’ll do otherwise “crazy” things such as slide way too early, or go way to the infield or backstop side of the plate so as to avoid contact with the F2... who was likely “camped out” on or in front of the plate. We PU’s need to position ourselves so as to see all the elements as they converge – origin of throw, Runner at or arriving from 3B, and F2 (or whichever Fielder) positioning himself at the plate – instead of just ambiguously moving to the Library or 1BLX, mask in hand, and pivoting-in-place as everything passes you from left-to-right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, MadMax said:

Ah, by citing the rule and explaining it, @maven clarified that MC, committed by the offense is a form of Interference. And that it supersedes Obstruction. Runners are charged, above all else in Fed, with “avoiding contact”. That, despite Obstruction presenting itself or occurring, the onus is on the Runner to reduce or avoid contact.

This is why great latitude should be given to amateur players who “weave through traffic” provided there isn’t a play being made upon them. I’ve actually been told of, and witnessed, umpires calling kids out for not running a direct line from base to base while the rest of the participants are standing, watching the ball in the outfield; or, conversely, calling a BR-kid out for running around F1 or F3 trying to catch a pop-up in proximity to the 1BL. Not for interference, but for not interfering.

No wonder our job is so hard. We have to overcome idiocy in our own ranks.

So, back to OBS-MC-INT... With OBS “called” in his favor (initially), that doesn’t give R3 a “free pass” to committ MC. His act of MC upon the Fielder, in this case, eclipses the OBS and since Interference brings with it an immediate Dead Ball, someone is going to be Out (in this case, the Runner). Any coach that contests this can be countered with, “Yeah, Roger, but he didn’t have to hit/truck/knock him flat. He has to avoid contact, and that collision we just saw wasn’t brought to him.”

This situation is a great example as to why we also have to recognize – and call – Obstruction (at the plate, especially) when it presents itself. Because Runners are charged with avoiding contact, they’ll do otherwise “crazy” things such as slide way too early, or go way to the infield or backstop side of the plate so as to avoid contact with the F2... who was likely “camped out” on or in front of the plate. We PU’s need to position ourselves so as to see all the elements as they converge – origin of throw, Runner at or arriving from 3B, and F2 (or whichever Fielder) positioning himself at the plate – instead of just ambiguously moving to the Library or 1BLX, mask in hand, and pivoting-in-place as everything passes you from left-to-right.

Got it. Did not realize that technically MC is INT. 

I also agree that far too many times guys miss OBS at the plate. Looks like a nice clean play, but they missed the runner sliding into the catcher before he had the ball, etc.

Overall, I think guys are way too eager to bang guys out at the plate. Maybe because it’s more fun and dramatic? In other words, they err on the side of out. Looking for the out. Gearing up for the out. There’s a relay, a catch, a tag, out. Never mind that he touched the plate first or there was obstruction

Anyone else sense this or am I taking crazy pills? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Got it. Did not realize that technically MC is INT. 
I also agree that far too many times guys miss OBS at the plate. Looks like a nice clean play, but they missed the runner sliding into the catcher before he had the ball, etc.
Overall, I think guys are way too eager to bang guys out at the plate. Maybe because it’s more fun and dramatic? In other words, they err on the side of out. Looking for the out. Gearing up for the out. There’s a relay, a catch, a tag, out. Never mind that he touched the plate first or there was obstruction
Anyone else sense this or am I taking crazy pills? 


I agree that obstruction at the plate isn’t called as often as it happens in Fed. I think it’s a carryover from other rule sets that allow for “in the act of fielding” on such plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, grayhawk said:

 


I agree that obstruction at the plate isn’t called as often as it happens in Fed. I think it’s a carryover from other rule sets that allow for “in the act of fielding” on such plays.

 

It's rarely called in any rule set. Mainly because it's a very difficult call with lots of other things happening in pretty close to real time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In FED, the only time a runner who commits MC can score is if he makes contact with F2 after touching the plate.  In this case, the MC supersedes the OBS, as is explicitly stated in FED rules, and no run scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CaBlue said:

In FED, the only time a runner who commits MC can score is if he makes contact with F2 after touching the plate.  In this case, the MC supersedes the OBS, as is explicitly stated in FED rules, and no run scores.

Could be any fielder, of course (sometimes F1 is backing up the play and in the "wrong" place).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×