Malicious Contact Thought Process

[umpire_scott]

I know that most of these situations are HTBT, but is there a process you go through to rule on this?

 

I had a play in my game on Sunday R2 was coming home on a base hit with two outs.  F2 was standing on the plate as the throw came in.  Ball beat runner by a few steps.  F2 after receiving the throw kneels down with ball in glove to apply the tag.  In doing so he blocks the plate.  R2 starts to look like he is going to slide but ends up plowing into the F2.  R2 comes up complaining that F2 was blocking the plate and so he couldn't slide, and F2 comes up complaining that R2 needs to slide to avoid contact.  There was no lowering of the shoulder by R2 and he sort of half slid half rolled into F2.  The contact was not huge, but there was a collision.

[maven]

You've got work to do before you think about MC.

1. Call OBS if you've got it. The runner might be right. A lot of guys let F2 get away with murder in this regard. If we called this more, we'd have fewer collisions.
2. Penalize illegal slides.You don't mention the code but FED defines an illegal slide in 2-32-2, and many leagues adopt "FED slide rules." An illegal slide that affects the pattern of play is INT in FED (8-4-2-b).
3. You could conceivably have both OBS and INT in the play described. Call both. Enforce the INT: remember that OBS entitles the runner to an award, which is the right to run the bases legally without being put out. If the runner does not run the bases legally (misses one, fails to retouch, commits MC or INT) he is still liable to be out on appeal or for his other infractions. FED 2-2-1
4. Make sure you know what a trainwreck is: it's a play involving a (possibly violent) collision that involves no violations of any rule. For a play at the plate, F2 must not be obstructing, and the runner must be trying to avoid him and so not interfering. If the throw then takes F2 into the runner's path (and, for FED, he possesses the ball prior to contact), the collision is legal even if both players are knocked into next week.
5. Now, MC: you should use this as a last resort, and it should be obvious to everyone in the park. Don't nitpick this call: it has to be big. When it's big, it calls itself. "Smaller" illegal contact (such as the "chicken wing") might warrant a response like a warning.

[immaculate1976]

If the catcher has the ball he can block the plate it is up to the runner to either slide or avoid contact.

There is going to be contact on a play like this so what you now have to look at is was the contact

 

Regular - This would be a slide where the catcher gets his leg moved he is either safe or out

Contact - This would be what you had above where the kid does not slide but there is no MC he is out no matter what for it

MC - This would be if he lowers the shoulder or pushes the catcher, he is out and ejected

[sdix00]

If it helps, NFHS published a POE on this to help decide what MC is.   I believe NFHS published the POE nationally, but here is a link to the CIF-SS memo to coaches and umpires. 

http://www.cifss.org/admin/images/previews/2014%20Preview.pdf

 

This is what I took away from the POE (AAEI):

MALICIOUS CONTACT (Avoidable, Above the waist, Excessive Force,  Intent to injure)

 

POINTS OF EMPHASIS

(Umpires and coaches should thoroughly familiarize themselves and review the below guidelines for malicious contact. It is also suggested that coaches take a moment to familiarize their players with these guidelines.) The NFHS is concerned that this rule is not being consistently enforced. In determining whether contact is malicious, the following should be considered. (1) Did the runner have a chance to avoid the contact. If the ball arrives ahead of the runner, the umpire must decide if the runner had a chance to avoid contact. If contact occurs, it could be called an illegal slide or malicious contact. This is umpire judgment. (2) Was the contact the result of excessive force? The intentional lowering of a shoulder into a defensive player, usually the catcher, would be considered excessive force, and thus, malicious contact. A player who loses his balance then collides with the catcher or fielder may be guilty of an illegal slide but not necessarily malicious contact. Sometimes, a runner will put up his arms to protect himself against a collision with a fielder or a catcher. In this case, even if a fielder or catcher is knocked off his feet, it would be an illegal slide, but it may not necessarily be malicious contact. These are judgment calls for the umpire and they require that the umpire take a moment to process not only what he sees, but the intent of the runner. (3) Did the contact occur above the waist of the receiving player? Home plate and the bases are on the ground. A runner who makes intentional contact above the waist is quite likely not attempting to reach the plate or base. (4) Was there intent to injure? The throwing of an elbow or the intentional lowering of a shoulder would be an example of an intent to injure. Remember, that malicious contact supersedes obstruction. So, a fielder or catcher blocking the base or plate without the ball, is not a mitigating factor in determining malicious contact. The runner is still obligated to perform a legal slide or attempt to avoid contact. See Rule 2-32-1,2 for definition of a legal and illegal slide.

 

[Replacematt]

If the catcher has the ball he can block the plate it is up to the runner to either slide or avoid contact.

There is going to be contact on a play like this so what you now have to look at is was the contact

 

Regular - This would be a slide where the catcher gets his leg moved he is either safe or out

Contact - This would be what you had above where the kid does not slide but there is no MC he is out no matter what for it

MC - This would be if he lowers the shoulder or pushes the catcher, he is out and ejected

 

This is incorrect. Contact does not necessarily mean an illegal act.

[immaculate1976]

 

If the catcher has the ball he can block the plate it is up to the runner to either slide or avoid contact.

There is going to be contact on a play like this so what you now have to look at is was the contact

 

Regular - This would be a slide where the catcher gets his leg moved he is either safe or out

Contact - This would be what you had above where the kid does not slide but there is no MC he is out no matter what for it

MC - This would be if he lowers the shoulder or pushes the catcher, he is out and ejected

 

This is incorrect. Contact does not necessarily mean an illegal act.

 

 

If the player does not slide but does run into the catcher with MC he is out for the contact but not ejected for MC

[umpcoachfather]

No rule exist that states this  - "R2 needs to slide to avoid contact". 

[Thunderheads]

No rule exist that states this  - "R2 needs to slide to avoid contact". 

you expect an F2 to know that???? LOL