EJECTED  (  justified  ?  )

[default]

MLK day championship game and one of my girls was ejected without warning. She hit the ball to their 1st baseman. The girl feilds the ball, with no runners on, and makes the choice to straddle the foul line instead of going back aprx 10ft and touching the bag. Our girl runs hard in the base path colliding with their 1st baseman. She did not raise her forarms or lower her shoulder; but pulled her arms in before contact.

We teach our 1st baseman to apply A two handed tag to prevent the ball from popping out and to stop advancement from runners. We also tell them to be prepared for the force of the on coming runner.

Was our girl wrong for running hard to 1st base or should she have slowed down as the ASA umpire suggested ?

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

No way should your runner ever slow down. She has every right to the base path (3 feet on right side of 1st base line) and as long as she didn't do anything unsportsmanlike, there is no reason why she should have been thrown out.

Reasons to be thrown out would include lowering your shoulder and doing a football like block into the 1st baseman, knocking the 1st baseman off of her feet with a brutal push, etc. The only way this umpire was correct was if one of these things happened.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

Should she have been ejected? Hard to say without seeing the play. All we have to go on is the description from one participant that obviously has some emotional investment in the outcome.

Here's what the rule book says (ASA rule #8-7-Q) :

"The runner is out: Q) When a defensive player has the ball and the runner remains upright and crashes into the defensive player. If the act is determined to be flagrant, the offender shall be ejected."

At the least, judging by your description, the runner should have been called out. Whether or not the collision was "flagrant" is strictly umpire judgement.

As Flanagan correctly notes, lowering a shoulder or a brutal push makes the "flagrant" call an easy one. But, neither is necessary to get an ejection. If, in the umpire's judgement, the runner had time to avoid the collision and instead chose to crash the fielder, even without the thrown shoulder or elbow the crash could still be judged "flagrant".

Any crash of a defender should be judged on its own merit. Every umpire will have a slightly different opinion of what consitutes "flagrant", even if their judgement is roughly based on the same rule and guidelines.

Since you did see the play, ask yourself two questions.

Did the runner have ample time to avoid the crash if she had chosen to do so?

If she had time, did she make any effort to swerve, slow, go around, or avoid the collision?

If you answer "yes" to the first question and "no" to the second, then the crash was obviously intentional and warranted an out call.

As for "flagrant" and an ejection, the runners actions are right on the brink of the very definition of an ejectionable offense. When a runner purposely puts herself in that position, she is at the whim of the umpire's judgement and, depending on what he saw, the call might go either way.

Without seeing the play I can't positively say if the correct call was made. Whatever happened was obviously, in the opinion of the umpire making the call, an ejectionable offense.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

If the 1st baseman was straddling the line with ball in hand 10' infront of the bag and the runner made no attempt to avoid the collision I would have ejected her also. The rule changes last year gave the runner an open bag until which point the fielder has the ball.

Your runner had the runners lane going to first, she should have been in it and not trying to play maliciously. I know you might agrue that she was just playing hard, and I might give you that if the fielder was straddling the running lane. These girls are not professionals being paid to win at all costs. This is a competitive game that requires umpires to protect these kids from themselves.

As coaches our primary responsibility is to protect these girls, our team or our opponents, from injury. If the situation was reversed, how would you feel if your daughter was the first baseman that just got her clocked cleaned for no apparent reason?

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

Though it may not have any bearing on what is right and what is wrong out of curiousity what age bracket was this and where there any runners on when this happened

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

I tell my girls to use the Running lane and try to avoid collision.
If the 1st baseman is straddling the running lane then it should be an interferance call anyway on the first baseman. The runner has the right to a running lane as to avoid this whole scenerio anyway. I have seen many 1st basemen get hurt by trying to interfere with a runner rounding 1st and heading to second more than anything.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

You can't fault your player for playing hard and running through a tag. If I had been umpiring, and saw no effort to avoid contact, I would have made the same call (ejection). If she had tried to avoid contact and ran hard through the fielders tag or if the fielder ran into your runner while trying to apply the tag, I still have an out, but no ejection.
The rules are clear in the rulebook, but how each umpire interprets the situation will be different. Most important job of an umpire is safety first!! JMHO

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

I would have to agree with The3dm and LADY_KNIGHTS about being out and ejected.

The 1st baseman had the ball and was waiting to make a play. No interference possible here Wave16.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

Buckeye, I didn't mean the first baseman in the original post was guilty of interference. I was just making a blanket statement that the runner has to be afforded a running lane to make the base, or face an interference call, or pay the piper. I have seen interference called a lot last year when the first baseman stood straddling the baseline. The other coach screamed, but the ump said that blocking the base was asking for a hit, so he gave the runner the base even though she would have been clearly out if first baseman wouldn't have blocked the running lane.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

It is not interference when the post states that the first baseman fielded the ball. It wasn't like she was waiting for a throw. IMHO it was a poor judgement call on the batter on not trying to avoid the tag, not only was she out anyway you lost her for the rest of the game. From the post it sounds like an easy out, she wasn't advancing runners. That is most likely why she was ejected also.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

Wave16,

I would hope that the call you had on the play you describe was OBSTRUCTION, not INTERFERENCE.

Repeat this mantra and you too will be able to amaze your friends and teammates with your uncanny grasp of the softball rules.

"The defense OBSTRUCTS, the offense INTERFERES...The defense OBSTRUCTS, the offense INTERFERES...The defense OBSTRUCTS, the offense INTERFERES..."

Your post does bring up a twist to the obstruction/interference rule.

If the defense is guilty of obstruction (that is, blocking a base without the ball) and the runner still decides to crash into the fielder, then the interference call takes precedence over the obstruction call.

In short, if you have both obstruction and interference on the same play, the obstruction is ignored and the penalty for interference is enforced.

If an umpire says that a fielder blocking a base was "asking for it" and allows the runner to blast into them without penalty, he is not properly applying this rule.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

After reading through the posts in this thread, I have one more nit to pick. Sorry to bore you all with technicalities! ;D

Several posters refered to "the running lane" on this play. One even went so far as to describe it as the three-foot line which is in foul territory, to the right side of the foul line.

Yes, that is a good description of "the running lane" and where it is on a properly marked field- if you're lucky enough to play on a field where they actually mark it.

However, the three foot running lane has absolutely NO bearing on this play.

The ONLY time the three foot running lane is a factor is when the fielder is taking a throw at first base. If the runner is out of the lane and interferes with the fielder taking the throw, then the runner is out.

Clearly not the case on this play, as the fielder was not in the act of receiving a throw and the runner was not preventing the fielder from catching the ball. The runner here had no obligation to be running within the three foot running lane. For all practical purposes, the running lane does not exist on this play.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

bretman

Initial poster said 1st baseman "makes the choice to straddle the foul line" which means she is half in, half out of the run lane. Since she is straddling the line, why wouldn't the runner have every right to the run lane, as long as the runner stays in the run lane? If the 1st baseman is in the run lane, I tell my players to run hard directly to 1st base. If the 1st baseman is in the run lane, any portion of the run lane, and my runner does nothing flagrant, she has every right to do this. Maybe I am missing something?

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

I believe that we are looking at a reasonable attempt to avoid contact being the issue. If she makes a reasonable attempt, and the first baseman doesnt have the ball - obstruction is the call. If she does have the ball, and the runner doesnt make a reasonable attempt to avoid contact, then it is deemed intentional.

Now, from what I read, the book says that the runner is to use the running lane. I dont see where it says that she has exclusive right to it - no more than a runner going into another bag has exclusive rights.

The umpire's judgement has to err on the side of safety. The runner going to first has the right to surrender. If she goes around the runner to avoid the tag - she is out. If she gets tagged she's out. If she runs alongside the fielder and the ball comes loose, she's safe. If she crashes into the runner - -it is flagrant.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

Regarding the three foot running lane...

Refer to ASA rule #8-2-E.

The ONLY function of the three foot lane is to determine if the batter-runner interferes with the fielder at first TAKING A THROW.

On plays where no throw is being made- like the play that started this thread- the running lane means nothing. Essentially, for this play, it does not exist.

There is no rule that says the batter-runner advancing to first must stay within the running lane. The only rule covering this lane is that the batter-runner may not be both outside of it and interfere with the fielder taking a throw. Even if she runs outside the lane, but doesn't interfere with the fielder, she is not automatically out.

There is no rule preventing a fielder, with possession of the ball, from standing in this lane or blocking the base or the runners basepath.

On the play described, neither the runner nor the fielder "own" the running lane. It has absolutely no bearing on this play. Ignore it and call the interference the same as it would be called at any other base.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

If the first baseman has the ball and the runner has time to avoid contact but chooses not to and collides then the runner should be ejected. Wave this holds true even if the first baseman is in the running lane so your pay the piper statement is wrong. defense having ball means runners need to avoid contact if possible. the if possible is the grey area and one that i lost 2 catchers on last year. one at usssa states and one at nsa states.
no50 once the first baseman has the ball what right do you think your base runner has? if the first baseman comes up the line which is how i teach my girls depending on baserunners, do you think your runner has the right to try to knock the ball out of her glove or what. the post said the first baseman fielded the ball unless that act and the collision occurred almost at the same time this is cut and dry. softball people not rugby

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

The 3 foot run lane is causing havoc with how umpires are calling the runner out. I have seen some umpires call the girl AUTOMATICALLY out if she goes 3'1". I have seen other umpires not say a thing when the runner is 5'0".

Bretman, I take it the run lane should be pretty much like MLB...those guys are never close to the run lane. Correct? Except under certain circumstances, should I be teaching my girls not to worry about the 3' lane?

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

the other piece of this is that there has to be a throw from the catcher towards the 1B for there to be an interference call. I used to believe that if the catcher went to make the throw, but decided not to, that it was still interference - in my umpires class I was shown the error of my ways. Then again, I was also told that having the catcher drill the runner was cause for ejection.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

The next time an umpire calls your runner ?out AUTOMATICALLY, just for being outside the running lane, file a protest.

The runner can only be called out if she is; A) out of the running lane, and; B) interferes with the fielder taking the throw.

BOTH things have to happen to get the out called. The mere fact that the runner is out of the lane means nothing. If she is out of the lane, but does not interfere with the fielder, she should not be called out.

About the only time this rule comes into play is when the throw is being made from behind the runner, from the vicinity of home plate, such as on bunts or uncaught third strikes. It would be very rare for the three foot running lane to have any effect on routine ground balls/throws to first from the infield.

If there is no throw being made on the play, ignore the running lane. It means nothing unless there is a throw.

Teach your girls to always stay in the running lane whenever there is a throw being made to first base if the throw is coming from behind them, usually from the catcher. Stay in the lane on those plays and you should never have any problems.

This should never be an issue on throws from the infield positions, as the chances of the runner interfering with the fielder are rare. Theoretically, you could still be called out for interference, but you would have to be WAY out of the lane to interfere with the throw. I've never seen a runner called out for a running lane violation on this type of play.

 

[default]

Re: EJECTED ?( ?justified ?? ?)

Thanks Bretman. I appreciate your points.