Leaderboard

Multiple times. Been great every time. I don't think you can go wrong with them or Ump-attire. Both have been great in my experience.

When the runner slid through the base did he make contact with the fielder on the other side of the bag? Or did he make contact with the fielder while the fielder was on the bag?

Possibly, but my comprehension of the rule is not. Basically, you said you were going to EJ his players if they did it again. You also seem to imply that sliding with your torso up is illegal. Then you say he slid through the base. Hmm Maybe the D coach needs to teach his SS how to turn 2!

They're great, highly recommend. I use for all my state purchases.

Yes, multiple times, both for stuff I bought for myself or needed for my state association. Competitive prices and always shipped/delivered quickly. They have a decent rewards program as well and it can help save a few bucks on shipping costs or the item itself. Can only say positive things about Ump-Attire but Purchase is very good, too.

Read rule 2-32 Art.2.

picture 2 (under the bruise) looks an awful lot like the McDavid tights with the waffle pattern thigh protection. I cut them off (hemmed them) and turned them into shorts.

The shoes are here. The 11 1/2‘s are just a tad long on me, but I think I’ll keep them so my toe doesn’t come into contact with the steel toe. They are lightweight and comfortable to wear. I feel like they will be easy to clean up and keep in good condition. The only thing I don’t truly care for is the white logo. It isn’t stitched on, but just silk-screened onto the shoe. I don’t know, it just feels kind of cheap.

I do not believe we want a specific definition. I like @maven's words on this and agree. There are some things that having a specific definition on starts to tie our hands rather than free up our judgment. I would bring focus to the bolded line above though. While I wouldn't consider that malicious contact in and of itself, I think it definitely lends itself to helping make your case. This is an illegal action that is being done deliberately. It is an action that intends to use illegal force to attain a desired outcome. The intent may not be to injure, but the intent is to use illegal force. The size discrepancy, as you note, may be the deciding factor. As you said, a similarly sized catcher may have had a different outcome and negated the MC factor, even though the action was still the same. The specific action was intended either way, but doing so in one case is wantonly reckless. From this, I think your MC was a justified call.

Definitely like the off-set color side panels better. That's just a blue work shirt. Nothing to make it stand out or present professionalism. That screams "Saturday at the barbeque."

To add on to this, even if you were to invoke the 'pitch, play or attempted play' to deny a subsequent appeal (after relaxed action), in FED, if the offense causes the defense to make another play versus making their appeal, they do not lose their right for the appeal after said play or attempted play.