Player ejected

[Wahini]

That was my thought if the catcher is physically preventing her from getting to the base she could just as easily been ejected. As catcher jumps to avoid the slide she lands on top of her that is "natural" she continues to lay on top of her as the play is live "not natural".

The biggest thing obviously is the nature of the shove and this is 100% in the eye of the beholder, it is a judgement call and absolutely nothing you can do about it, although if you are laying on the ground on your back its pretty hard to see how you would be viewed as the "aggressor" acting maliciously. Be that as it may if the umpire thought the player was acting aggressively and maliciously towards another player they don't really have a choice if that shove looks more like a punch...again no real choice and strictly in the eyes of the beholder.

As far as just laying there and counting on the umpire to call the obstruction...I'm never teaching that to my players, you should hustle and do whatever you can while the ball is live to score for your team or get an out for your team...let the umps sort it out later.

Yes she said all the could think of was getting to the base to get the run and was trying to get the catcher out of the way of that. Was the right action to just lie there and wait for ump to call obstruction on catcher? As someone says hard to do in your 30 second dash when objective of game is to touch that home plate

 

[_MIA_]

Judgement call and without seeing the play in person it is hard to judge...

 

[Wahini]

Correct ... I didn’t mean the “aftermath” I meant in the moments immediately after. Things such as:

Were there words exchanged?

Did either player continue to go after the other or “linger” afterwards?

What were both players’ reactions?

Wahini — I am sure she probably was devastated and that is unfortunate. Hopefully she doesn’t let it get in her head and impact her down the road. Note I am not saying it was the right call. Just that it could have been.

In all my years, I have had plenty of coaches eject themselves from games. I have had plenty of parents exercise the option to no longer participate in the game. I have never had to remove a player though. I’ve issued warnings, I’ve had talks with players, and I’ve offered advice to players, but fortunately I’ve never had to drop one.

The choice to eject a player is one an umpire should make very precisely. I am not saying that you should let players get away with things or justify their actions. I am saying that an ejection of a player should be more than a punishment, it should be a preventative action to stop any additional issues. IMO, “this isn’t going to stop, so I have to stop it.”

Afterward the play she went to the dugout to get ready for fielding, the coach came in and told her the ump ejected her and she had to leave. Shwe asked why and he told us for shoving

 

[Ken Krause]

I suppose it depends on the nature of the shove. If her hands were already on the catcher and she tried to push her off, probably not going to get called. If her hands were not on the catcher, then she forcefully brought her hands to the catcher, it looks more like an aggressive, deliberate action and the umpire might toss her to keep things calm between the two teams.

Something to keep in mind is the umpire (probably) doesn't know how nice and sweet this girl is, and that she'd never hurt a fly. He doesn't know she's the team councilor. All he has to judge by is what's in front of him. If he sees it as an aggressive or uncalled-for act, or something that could be the start of a situation that could escalate quickly between the two teams, he's going to call it.

Just unfortunate. But lesson learned for the future.

 

[WVSteven]

If someone was inappropriately laying on top of you, are you not going to defend yourself?

Absolutely and she may have been well within the boundaries that would be reasonable under the circumstances. If one player simply shoves another that's an automatic. If you are trying to remove a player lying on top of you, you have some leeway to remove her. There would be a point in time, I can see, when the shove could have been more aggressive than necessary. Again, we are speculating on a play we did not see. In what manner was the catcher lying on her? How much was her movement restricted? Was there possible physical pain/distress? All these factors would need to be considered.

All that aside, if it was deemed malicious contact, then it would take precedence over obstruction. And that is something you'd have to be there to say for sure.

 

[bmakj]

All that aside, if it was deemed malicious contact, then it would take precedence over obstruction. And that is something you'd have to be there to say for sure.

couldnt it be both, ie C obstructed, and BR overreacted with malicious contact. on obstruction, which occurred first, BR is awarded home, runs scores, then player is tossed?

 

[Wahini]

couldnt it be both, ie C obstructed, and BR overreacted with malicious contact. on obstruction, which occurred first, BR is awarded home, runs scores, then player is tossed?

I believe thats what happened, I dont think the contact was malicious or intended as such at all, just a player trying to get to the plate. But it was seen that way by theump, as ken krause said, the ump doesnt know what kind of player she is or whats in her head, only what he sees in that 30 seconds. Lessons learned I guess.

 

[MTR]

The word candyass keeps coming to mind and I'm not thinking of the runner

 

[mmeece]

I realize I'm going full "back in my day" old guy here, but I keep seeing the phrase "malicious contact" applied to things that crack me up when compared with how baseball/softball used to be played, Many of the changes have been for the better, creating a safer game, but in the process I hope we haven't created an environment where ANY contact or aggressiveness becomes "malicious"

 

[The Man In Blue]

That is a valid point mmeece and unfortunately where we see things like this ejection (as described by Wahini). The pendulum swings back and forth on trying to give umpires leeway in interpreting what they see versus trying to clearly define events/actions. When things get lost in the middle, some umpires resort to “zero tolerance” type interpretations.

You cannot clearly define everything. As you hear us say frequently on here “had to see it to give a definitive answer”.