In a very close ballgame that was well pitched by East's Criswell and Russell's Suiter. This game got a little wild on a play at the plate when the East Carter catcher (McWhorter) was blocking the plate and the Russell runner (Kasey Clark) didn't slide. Obviously, there was a big collision, Clark was called out, but was never tagged, EC coaching staff wanted him ejected for not sliding and one of the EC assistant coaches ended up getting tossed. According to the home plate umpire, he was called out for not sliding, but as I understand it there is not a mandatory slide rule in High School baseball.

 

On a side note. Great job by McWhorter of holding onto the ball.

 

If Clark had slid feet first, he would not have been able to get to the plate as McWhorter had it nicely covered. The ball and Clark got there at about the same time.

 

Russell left the bases loaded in the bottom of the 7th and East Carter held onto the 4-3 win.

There was definitely a collision. Clark lowered his shoulder and drilled the catcher. McWhorter came away with a headache and a bloody lip, but held on. Both teams played well, a postseason atmosphere.

Here's my two cents based on your description (and pretty much black and white from the rule book). Defensive players (and catchers in particular) are not permitted to block a base without the ball. If the ball arrives first, you can block. If not, the correct call for this situation is to signal a delayed dead ball, and then award the runner the base for obstruction, regardless of what happens on the play (out or safe). (However, I'm aware that quite a few umpires do not apply this rule properly. I've had to do it twice in my "career".)

But, in no case, does obstruction supersede malicious contact (rule book quote). In other words, an obstructed runner does not have the right to clear his own path to his intended base. He should be called out for malicious contact (and he should be ejected as well).

 

Note: It is not malicious contact if he does not slide. The malicious contact comes from lowering his shoulder in an attempt to dislodge the ball. You can have a legal "inadvertent" collision when the ball and runner arrive at the same time that is legal. The question an umpire must answer is "did the runner have time to make a decision to avoid the defensive player". (It's sort of like the difference between a charge and a block in basketball). If he did, and chose to collide with the defensive player rather than avoid him, then you've got an out for malicious contact and an ejection.

There was definitely a collision. Clark lowered his shoulder and drilled the catcher. McWhorter came away with a headache and a bloody lip, but held on. Both teams played well, a postseason atmosphere.

Clark spun away from the tag! As I was told by a very reliable and fair umpire who witnessed the play! I believe you maybe be thinking about him lowering his shoulder and giving East Carter headaches in November!!

If you were told he spun away, you were given false info. Nothing against Clark, but he never spun awayfrom the tag. The East catcher was ran over. The only umpires present were the 2 umpiring the game who failed to do their job, and Clark's dad who happens to be the assigning secretary of umpires.

If you were told he spun away, you were given false info. Nothing against Clark, but he never spun awayfrom the tag. The East catcher was ran over. The only umpires present were the 2 umpiring the game who failed to do their job, and Clark's dad who happens to be the assigning secretary of umpires.

 

 

What are you trying to say? Are you saying the umpire botched the call or are you saying something else? Are you trying to imply something? Because the umpire on hand is a great umpire with around 30 years experience. By rule, he made the correct call. I don't know if you have a misunderstanding of the rules but the play was reviewed and it was determined the umpire made the correct call. The umpire DID do his job.

What are you trying to say? Are you saying the umpire botched the call or are you saying something else? Are you trying to imply something? Because the umpire on hand is a great umpire with around 30 years experience. By rule, he made the correct call. I don't know if you have a misunderstanding of the rules but the play was reviewed and it was determined the umpire made the correct call. The umpire DID do his job.

 

Please explain what you feel the correct call should have been. From my view of the play, the catcher NEVER tagged Clark. The Catcher was standing in front of the plate, blocking the entire thing. The throw came at the same time as Clark trying to touch the plate. The throw was slightly behind the catcher, causing him to turn slightly backwards, thus allowing Clark to hit him in the side/back. No tag was made.

 

From those circumstances, the umpire has two choices. #1) Call malicious contact, the runner is automatically out and tossed from the game, or #2) the runner is safe due to the fact that no tag was made and the catcher obstructed the base.

 

This is the problem. If it was malicious contact, the umpire should have enforced the rule and tossed Clark out of the game. If it wasn't, there is no way Clark could be called out. I don't care if the umpire has 100 years of experience, he blew it by not calling either #1 or #2. He took the easy road.

Please explain what you feel the correct call should have been. From my view of the play, the catcher NEVER tagged Clark. The Catcher was standing in front of the plate, blocking the entire thing. The throw came at the same time as Clark trying to touch the plate. The throw was slightly behind the catcher, causing him to turn slightly backwards, thus allowing Clark to hit him in the side/back. No tag was made.

 

From those circumstances, the umpire has two choices. #1) Call malicious contact, the runner is automatically out and tossed from the game, or #2) the runner is safe due to the fact that no tag was made and the catcher obstructed the base.

 

This is the problem. If it was malicious contact, the umpire should have enforced the rule and tossed Clark out of the game. If it wasn't, there is no way Clark could be called out. I don't care if the umpire has 100 years of experience, he blew it by not calling either #1 or #2. He took the easy road.

 

Agreed!