What would you call this?

[_MIA_]

I'm going with a good open field tackle.

Exactly, they are not allowed to hit them in the head anymore so what is a tackler supposed to do ?

 

[radness]

Exactly, they are not allowed to hit them in the head anymore so what is a tackler supposed to do ?

Body slam

 

[Top_Notch]

When I first watched it, my initial impression was the slide was not malicious. It appeared the runner put her head down and tried to dive for the bag and was met by a fielder.

 

[ang2bmd]

Just a poor base runner making a poor attempt at a dive.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[Stxdad]

My opinion it goes both ways, run path is blocked or obstructed

 

[Laphoneman]

Don’t obstruct the base path and thats an easy tag and out.

 

[Rolling Hard]

I think the catcher may have been able to tag the runner without a throw. The catcher puts the ball back in her glove as she runs at base runner (mistake) then makes a horrible throw to the 1st baseman (mistake). 1st baseman makes a non urgent (slow) transfer and the SS is out of position. Coach has a lot to work on.

 

[texasheat]

My opinion it goes both ways, run path is blocked or obstructed

Really? The basepath is essentially 6 foot wide. That fielder was taking up all 6 feet?

 

[CHSUmp97]

I’m going to take a beating on this.

Obstruction, dead ball, runner safe.

Umpires, tell me why I’m wrong, lol

In order to rule obstruction, you have to determine if the runner was hindered or impeded by a fielder without possession of the ball. I never saw that happen.

Yes, the fielder was in a position where she could've obstructed, but the runner never showed she was impeded until she ran into the fielder, and by then the fielder did have the ball. Only in NCAA play would this have been ruled obstruction; in any other rule set, it wouldn't be.

I do have an out here for the runner maliciously contacting a fielder in possession of the ball. That was no headfirst slide. That was a runner intentionally crashing into the fielder. What made matters worse is she did so by leading with her head. To me, that's no different than if she had lowered her shoulder on used a forearm shiver. And because of the way she went at the fielder's knees with her helmet, she should be ejected for unsporting conduct.

 

[radness]

In order to rule obstruction, you have to determine if the runner was hindered or impeded by a fielder without possession of the ball. I never saw that happen.

Yes, the fielder was in a position where she could've obstructed, but the runner never showed she was impeded until she ran into the fielder, and by then the fielder did have the ball. Only in NCAA play would this have been ruled obstruction; in any other rule set, it wouldn't be.

I do have an out here for the runner maliciously contacting a fielder in possession of the ball. That was no headfirst slide. That was a runner intentionally crashing into the fielder. What made matters worse is she did so by leading with her head. To me, that's no different than if she had lowered her shoulder on used a forearm shiver. And because of the way she went at the fielder's knees with her helmet, she should be ejected for unsporting conduct.

What you describe is
The base path is
6 feet wide.
So defense can take half of it.

If defense stays in path they
dont own the base path.
They are in the base path.

Runner does NOT have to avoid...
Because its the base path.

What you describe is obstruction when that rule applys.
However runner does not have to change running path in either instance.

Btw there is no way to say intential take out or lousy dive mechanics.
Could as well say bad throw put defense in the way.
Or defense being in the way intentionally.

That collision wouldnt have happened if defense was not in the base path.
And they probly could have gotten the out.
...not droping the ball would have helped also!