Malicious no. Clumsy, yes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What would you call this?
- Thread starter flash277
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
- Dec 11, 2010
- 4,723
- 113
- Dec 11, 2010
- 4,723
- 113
And you face a tribunal of Mike White, Yukiko Ueno and probably Dot Richardson
- May 29, 2015
- 3,813
- 113
What I know for sure ... umpires need to hustle and get into correct positioning. That was not good mechanics.
I don’t have obstruction. “6 feet of basepath“ has nothing to do with obstruction or interference, so get that out of your head. Did the fielder, WITHOUT THE BALL, hinder or impede the runner? I do not have that from what I saw.
The question of malicious contact is not as clear. I don’t think it was. To me, that video looked like a runner misjudging and thinking the base was closer based on the fielder. That is NOT the same as the fielder obstructing. I can see how you could make a case for malicious contact, but I don’t think it was there.
Oh, and the runner needs to take the jewelry off. IMO.
I don’t have obstruction. “6 feet of basepath“ has nothing to do with obstruction or interference, so get that out of your head. Did the fielder, WITHOUT THE BALL, hinder or impede the runner? I do not have that from what I saw.
The question of malicious contact is not as clear. I don’t think it was. To me, that video looked like a runner misjudging and thinking the base was closer based on the fielder. That is NOT the same as the fielder obstructing. I can see how you could make a case for malicious contact, but I don’t think it was there.
Oh, and the runner needs to take the jewelry off. IMO.
There's just no way that qualifies as malicious contact. By definition, "malice" requires the intent to do harm, and I just don't see that here. The fact she was starting her dive/slide before the fielder even had the ball tells me she's trying to find a way to get around (through, I guess) the fielder. She hits the ground before she hits the fielder. Tough to see that on one viewing, but since we're trying to judge after the fact here, I think that matters.
It's close to obstruction, but I don't think it's that, either.
Think the umpire probably made the right call here.
It's close to obstruction, but I don't think it's that, either.
Think the umpire probably made the right call here.
Thought the same thing.
As a hockey official, I strongly second this observation!
And to the OP...if I'm umping this the runner is called out and ejected. Clear attempt to injure.
I'm curious. What part of it looks like an "attempt to injure" to you? And have you ever before seen an attempt to injure that's just a headfirst slide (a bad one, but a headfirst slide nonetheless)?
These girls look young, she might of thought the ss was standing on the bag. But I’ve never seen a runner lower her head like a damn bull and charge. That did seem like poor sportsmanship if she did it intentionally. Hard to tell unless you know that teams history. I’ve seen teams that I know aren’t dirty that I wouldn’t be bothered by it. but then some teams have that reputation and are proud to do shirt like that.
bad running and bad defensive position for a rundown. Never seen anything happen like in person, I’d be upset if that was my runner or defender.
bad running and bad defensive position for a rundown. Never seen anything happen like in person, I’d be upset if that was my runner or defender.
Cannonball
Ex "Expert"
- Feb 25, 2009
- 4,880
- 113
First, this team on defense needs to to a practice or two or three on how to do a proper defense of a runner caught off base. The catcher continually put the ball into her glove with her hand off of it. Her initial slide steps were great. She needed to show the ball with it being held up in throwing position so that she could throw it or throw a dart to whichever base she needed to throw to. After she began to close down the distance, she needed to turn that slide into a sprint where she forced the runner to commit to a base and then throw the dart to the baseperson. Instead she didn't create the angle to make the runner commit. She threw a lazy toss to 1B. 1B then had to throw to the SS who was in the wrong position. The SS should have been standing on the "inside" of the base giving 1B a clear throwing lane. When 1B threw the ball over the runner's head, that lazy high toss set up the contact. I don't disagree with Westwind that obstruction could have been the call. I won't say for sure since I don't have all of the angles. However, the runner didn't have another option but to make contact due to poor defensive fundamentals. JMHO.
I went and watched this again several times. The runner is beginning to slide or dive when the SS's feet are in the air. I don't know how anyone could see intent in this. A still photo like the one presented shows this. In that amount of time the runner, imo, was simply trying to get to the base. BTW, how could anyone expect a player to be able to adjust to such a poor defensive play in the blink of an eye. The runner was in the basepath. The fielder was in the basepath and up the line.
I went and watched this again several times. The runner is beginning to slide or dive when the SS's feet are in the air. I don't know how anyone could see intent in this. A still photo like the one presented shows this. In that amount of time the runner, imo, was simply trying to get to the base. BTW, how could anyone expect a player to be able to adjust to such a poor defensive play in the blink of an eye. The runner was in the basepath. The fielder was in the basepath and up the line.
Last edited:
