Slide Rules

[yawetag]

I'm interested in seeing what other youth organizations use for "must-slide" rules. I ask this because I disagree with my local organization, and would love to ask it to be changed. To do so, I'd like to see where their rule falls in line with other's.

To start, this is the organization's rule:

(No-Collision Rule) In the event that a defensive player is in possession of the ball and is waiting for the base runner, the base runner, having time to react, must:

A. Slide into the base - this applies to all bases.

B. Give himself up to be tagged.

C. Attempt to return to the last base achieved.

D. Obstruction/interference penalties will apply as ruled in the MLB rulebook.

Coaches need to remind their players of the rule pertaining to obstruction/interference and the proper method of making a tag during putouts.

At a recent training class, the rule was brought up. A situation was given: Runner advancing to home. F2 receives the ball and, with ball in glove, brings glove to baseline with enough time for runner to react. Runner avoids tag by side-stepping, staying well within 3 feet of his line, avoids the tag and touches the plate.

The trainer asked how I would call it. I replied "Safe." He said it was an out. When I asked why, he stated that the no-collision rule doesn't allow a runner to avoid the tag. I replied, "You'd rather him slide into the base, causing a collision, than make a good play and side-step, avoiding a collision? Isn't the rule called 'no-collision'?"

After a few minutes of back-and-forth between the two of us, he finally said "If you have a problem with the rule, write a letter to the board requesting it to be changed." His assumption of my stance was that I felt the rule wasn't needed; in fact, my stance was that calling it "no collision" isn't correct - a runner could still be called out for avoiding a collision.

So, what's your organization's rule on "no collision" or "must slide"?

[willv28]

yawetag, I assume this is little league. Our league does not have a "no collision" or "must slide" rule. Rule 7.08(a-3) may not be modified. No league may create a "must slide" rule if it's little league.

[Umpire in Chief]

That looks like many organizations no collision rule, but given that I'm with you, if he can legally side step a tag attempt he is safe. Common sense needs to dictate. I'd say that this wasn't a case of collision avoidance to begin with it is good base running and 7.08(a) allows the runner to avoid a tag with in 3' .

[kcfan102]

This is the most confused rule in our leage and our tournaments. All of these coaches think there is a no slide rule... there is no such thing. There is nothing in the USSSA (we're sanctioned by them) that says a player must slide. However, he must SEEK TO AVOID CONTACT.

This is the rule we use. It's in the USSSA book:

8.04.C Whenever a tag play is evident, a runner must slide or seek to avoid contact with the fielder and / or catcher.

Attempting to jump, leap, or dive over the fielder and / or catcher is not interpreted as seeking to avoid contact.

Malicious contact shall supersede all obstruction penalties.

Rule 8.04.C Penalty: The runner shall be called out and may be ejected from the game at the umpire’s discretion.

Rule 8.04.C Comment: When enforcing this rule, the umpire should judge the runner’s intent. If the umpire feels

that the contact was unintentional, then the runner should only be declared out. If the umpire feels that the contact

was intentional and / or malicious, then the runner should be declared out and ejected.

[catoblue]

I'm going to say that either this is NOT LL, or the BoD has made a local rule in error, as 7.08(a)(3) can not be modified by a local league. ONLY rules that explicitly state the option for a local rule may be changed.

Here's an excerpt from the 2010 RIM

7.08(a)(3) the runner does not slide or attempt to get around a fielder who has the ball and is waiting to make the tag; or

“The Right Call” Casebook -- Comment: There is “no“ must slide rule. The rule is slide or attempt to get around. The key in this situation is “fielder has the ball and is waiting to make the tag.”

INSTRUCTOR COMMENTS:

-Hurdling or going over the defensive player that has the ball and is waiting to make a tag is a legal maneuver. Rule 7.08(a) (3) does not prevent or make hurdling illegal.

-Rule 7.08(a-3) is easily the most misunderstood rule in the book. It is easily broken down as follows:

(1) The fielder must have the ball in his/her possession; AND

(2) The fielder must be WAITING to make the tag;

If BOTH of those two criteria are satisfied, then the runner must EITHER:

(1) Slide; OR

(2) ATTEMPT to get around the fielder.

-Notice that the rule says, “attempt to get around”, not “avoid”. Contact may occur with no penalty assessed.

-There is no “Must Slide” rule and no league may create one. No league may modify Rule 7.08(a-3).

[carolinablue]

I don't know why leagues try to rewrite this rule. To me the rule as it is written is a no collision rule. If a fielder has the ball and is waiting to make the tag a runner has two options, slide or try to avoid contact. If he does make contact, he is definately out and possibly ejected. By trying to change it they are just causing confusion while trying to achieve the same effect.

[DirtyDawg]

I won't do a league with a must-slide rule due to liability reasons. If the kid slides into a base and then breaks his leg due to having to slide the league (and quite possibly you in some cases) can be held liable for any damages done.

[yawetag]

yawetag, I assume this is little league.

Nope. Local rec league.

That looks like many organizations no collision rule, but given that I'm with you, if he can legally side step a tag attempt he is safe. Common sense needs to dictate. I'd say that this wasn't a case of collision avoidance to begin with it is good base running and 7.08(a) allows the runner to avoid a tag with in 3' .

Thanks, UIC. I'll give 7.08(a) as an example of legally being allowed to move around a tag. I agree that common sense should prevail, but when I tried to explain common sense (I know, I know! ) to the trainer, he couldn't see the light of day.

the league (and quite possibly you in some cases) can be held liable for any damages done.

I've heard this before, and it still doesn't make sense. How can I, an adjudicator of the rules, be sued for a kid sliding? I had NO bearing in the kid's choices.

[Dragon29]

yawetag,

First of all, talking to the trainer will do you (& him) no good. All he's doing is training students in the proper application of the rules. It's the rule that's bad, not the trainer. Leave him alone . . .

Second, you're right - there's no way an umpire could be held responsible for a kid getting injured during a league-mandated slide. No way. No judge in his/her right mind would even entertain such a case in their court.

[DirtyDawg]

yawetag,

Second, you're right - there's no way an umpire could be held responsible for a kid getting injured during a league-mandated slide. No way. No judge in his/her right mind would even entertain such a case in their court.

I wouldn't be willing to try to find this out. If a parent gets a good lawyer, they can find a way to make it happen. This is why in some leagues if you read your insurance contracts, you will notice that you have liability.

[Dragon29]

dirtydawg,

To each their own - I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything.

On the 'other' site, I read from a brother who is also a lawyer (guys - help me remember here who it was) that he did some research on this. Going back something like 5 years in both the US & Canada there were exactly zero cases of an umpire being held responsible for any injury or similar issues on the field of play.

I know that's 'hearsay' for the purposes of this discussion, but I've yet to hear of one substantiated case.

[yawetag]

yawetag,

First of all, talking to the trainer will do you (& him) no good. All he's doing is training students in the proper application of the rules. It's the rule that's bad, not the trainer. Leave him alone . . .

I apologize for the confusion. We had two trainers at this meeting: one was paid, the other was the league UIC, who is also a board member. He mentioned in our discussion that he was personally responsible for the current wording in the rulebook.

[Dragon29]

yawetag,

No need to apologize . . .

Sounds as if this guy didn't think things all the way through . . . ?

[catoblue]

I would go with your trainer's suggestion of a letter to the league, and use the quoted section I pulled from the LL RIM as an example of a "true" no collision rule as a suggested way to implement what they're ultimately trying to do - protect kids.

The official LL rule, does exactly what the BoD of your league wants to do (avoid a collision), by calling a runner out if they do not slide OR attempt to get around a fielder with the ball . This covers far more situations more effectively than what they currently have, especially with regard to protecting kids from injuries. Forcing a slide is asking for trouble, and provides more opportunity for injuries than giving the option for a side-step to try to get around a tag. The baseline violation is still there to prevent a side-step from getting too big.

LL has been collecting injury reports since the 1960's and "sliding" is one of the major causes of injuries after arm/shoulder injuries. While LL did not want to take away sliding, since it is a major part of the game, they did take some action to prevent injuries, both in equipment regulations and in the rules. Safety bases, no head first slide while advancing, and not forcing runners to slide with a "must slide" rule - instead, going with "slide or attempt to go around", essentially requiring players to "try not to collide with each other".

Your local BoD has good intentions, but could gain a lot from LL's years and years of experience in doing things to make the game safer for kids.

Edited April 23, 2010 by catoblue

[mstaylor]

Just remember the addage,"Local rules are made by fools."