Jump to content

Malicious contact


slo8140
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 4808 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

Quick rule interpretation question.

Runner is rounding third and will clearly score...he is obstructed by the third baseman...thus calling for a delayed dead ball and the award of home if he does not get there safely. Throw comes in from the outfield and the runner maliciously contacts the catcher. I know you eject the runner, but do you count the run or not? If the obstruction was not involved, I know that it is an out and ejection. Not sure what to do with the obstruction in this case.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Fed 3-3-1n Penalty: In (n), the ball is immediately dead, if on offense, the player is ejected and declared out, unless he has already scored.

3.3.1x: Upon rounding second, R1 maliciously runs into F6 who is (a) in the baseline. RULING: In (a), the malicious contact supersedes the obstruction. In (a), R1 is out and is also to be ejected because of the unsportsmanlike act.

[some parts not affecting the answer were removed]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick rule interpretation question.

Runner is rounding third and will clearly score...he is obstructed by the third baseman...thus calling for a delayed dead ball and the award of home if he does not get there safely. Throw comes in from the outfield and the runner maliciously contacts the catcher. I know you eject the runner, but do you count the run or not? If the obstruction was not involved, I know that it is an out and ejection. Not sure what to do with the obstruction in this case.

Thanks.

Don't count it, ignore the obstruction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fed 3-3-1n Penalty: In (n), the ball is immediately dead, if on offense, the player is ejected and declared out, unless he has already scored.

3.3.1x: Upon rounding second, R1 maliciously runs into F6 who is (a) in the baseline. RULING: In (a), the malicious contact supersedes the obstruction. In (a), R1 is out and is also to be ejected because of the unsportsmanlike act.

[some parts not affecting the answer were removed]

Damn. I would have thought that rule would have only applied if the player that is being maliciously contacted is commuting the obstruction, as in that case book case.

Since we have two different infractions in the OP, I decided to enforce both. Hmmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fed 3-3-1n Penalty: In (n), the ball is immediately dead, if on offense, the player is ejected and declared out, unless he has already scored.

3.3.1x: Upon rounding second, R1 maliciously runs into F6 who is (a) in the baseline. RULING: In (a), the malicious contact supersedes the obstruction. In (a), R1 is out and is also to be ejected because of the unsportsmanlike act.

[some parts not affecting the answer were removed]

Damn. I would have thought that rule would have only applied if the player that is being maliciously contacted is commuting the obstruction, as in that case book case.

Since we have two different infractions in the OP, I decided to enforce both. Hmmm

interesting scenerio.. glad i decided to look at this forum today!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is what I thought. I did not have time to look it up this morning...but you guys are like a great research think tank...pose a question and get an answer. It also makes sense for the Malicious Contact to super-cede the obstruction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how you could score this run. The rule book states repeatedly that MC is interference (dead ball, runner out) and it supersedes OBS.

I also seem to remember a thread about obstruction early in a rundown and then MC later in the rundown. The MC superseded the OBS, runner's ejected and called out. I'm not sure why this would be different. Even in LL, which isn't so explicit about MC superseded OBS, I'm not scoring this run unless he's already crossed the plate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thought process is that it was written in the OP that the runner will clearly score. But in re-reading the OP it doesn't state when the MC actually occured.

So if the runner scored before the MC then I'd count the run, EJ the player.

If the MC was before the run, No run, out & EJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if the runner scored before the MC then I'd count the run, EJ the player.

If the MC was before the run, No run, out & EJ.

Which is why the rule says "unless he has already scored."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here a few things to think about in this situation:

The obstruction only protects the runner to the next base ( in this case home). Since the umpire will award the runner home (only if the runner does not reach the "protected to" base safely), the actual run does not score until the runner touches/crosses home plate. Since the MC takes place prior to the runner touching/crossing the plate, the MC supersedes the OBS. Runner out and ejected for MC, run does not score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the run scored before the MC, wouldn't you ignore the obstruction anyway?

You can ignore the OBS, but you still should have signaled it when it occured. If you did that then you will be visited very shortly by a coach who is going to want to explain to you that the Ejection couldn't have happened because there was OBS.........................

and the beat goes on..........

Of course you would be 100% correct in telling him that MC always supercedes OBS, since the runner had ample opportunity to just do his thing Obstructed or not, without any type of malicious contact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...