Obstruction or Malicious Intent on the Runner?

Question
QUESTION: I was at a softball game the other day (High School Fast Pitch) and the batter hit a high fly ball that stayed in the infield. There were no runners on base and I'm pretty sure there were 2 outs. The second baseman clearly calls and identifies herself for the catch and clears an area around her. The first baseman has her foot on the front inside corner of the bag, even out of the way of the runner if she did decide to run to second base. Well, the second baseman makes the catch around the same time the runner was touching first base. Well, the first baseman has her foot on the bag, on the inside front corner, out of the rounding to second base path. The runner, after hitting the ball, immediate looked up and found the ball to be an obvious fly out, she runs full speed toward first, rounds out of the baseline like she will be rounding to second, and then purposefully ran directly into the first baseman. I can say that it was 100% on purpose because the runner even ducked her shoulder to bring more force upon impact, like football players do. She threw every bit of her weight into the back of the first basemen and was clearly trying to hurt or scare her. She wasn't trying to round first at all because she was going directly toward the first baseman looking dead at her the entire time. She crashes into the first baseman, parents start hollering because it was blatantly obvious, and there was no ejection or warning made for malicious intent but the batter/runner was called out since the second baseman did catch the ball. Is this malicious intent and would you eject someone for doing the same thing? Or, was this obstruction on the first baseman, who was simply covering first base in the event of a dropped pop-fly. Again, there were no runners on base and the ball was caught I would about 10-12 feet from first base by the second baseman. The first baseman had her foot on the inside front corner of the bag, was watching the ball after the second baseman had caller her off, and she was definitely not in the normal path runners take when rounding first headed toward second. I have played baseball for 20 years, and am currently in my eighth season of men's slow pitch softball.

Just to clear things up, I was not related to, nor was I friends with anyone involved in this game. I was a 100% unbiased bystander. I went because I was taking my little cousin to the game so he could sit with some of his friends, and it was a nice day outside so I stayed to watch a couple innings.

Was this obstruction on the first baseman or malicious intent on the runner?

ANSWER: Russell,

Based on your description, I would have tossed the batter.  To me you have described malicious contact.  It definitely is not obstruction, as you can't have obstruction on the defense due to the caught 3rd out.
Tom

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thank you for answering my question, Tom.

Another thing I would like to know is, if this wouldn't have been the third out, would it still be considered malicious intent instead of obstruction?

I would like to reiterate that the first baseman did have her foot on the front inside corner of the bag and had her glove up toward the second baseman and was watching the ball fall after the second baseman had called her off of it. The first baseman's initial reaction was one quick step toward second base, immediately followed by the second baseman shouting "mine, mine, mine" and waving her arms to clear the area around her, as is instructed when one player has the best shot of catching the ball, which the second baseman did since she was right underneath it and barely had to move to catch it.

As I said I was a 100% unbiased bystander to this event so I can see where some parents wanted the obstruction call since the first baseman was covering the bag even though the caught ball would have forced the runner out anyway. But I feel like the first baseman was just covering the bag in order to be "rather safe than sorry" if the second baseman had dropped the ball.

So, let me ask you this; If the second baseman had dropped the ball and the first baseman were standing with their foot on the inside front corner of the bag and the runner had made the turn and ran into the first baseman solely because she was covering the bag, which I feel it was her duty to cover the bag in case the pop-fly had been dropped, would that still be malicious intent or would that now be obstruction if the ball is dropped? So, for instance, say the same scenario happens but there are no outs. So, the batter hits a high infield pop-fly. The second baseman calls everyone off since she is already right underneath it and it comes almost directly to her. The first baseman, seeming as though she wants to play it safe, covers the bag in case the ball is dropped. The runner makes the same arch and runs into the first baseman and the ball is dropped around the same time. Does the runner get awarded obstruction since the ball wasn't caught, or does the runner get called for malicious contact since she clearly had no right to round first and head toward second since she clearly knew it was an infield pop-fly. There are no other runners on base, only the batter/runner. Then what happens?

Thanks,

Russell

Answer
Russell,

You are over thinking this.  The game situation does not matter.  If the batter/runner lowered her shoulder and plowed F3, you have malicious contact.  Dead ball, batter/runner out and tossed from the game.  This is all that matters.

The rules are written that both offense and defense have a duty to avoid contact.  If the batter/runner wanted the obstruction call in case of an error, she should avoid contact by altering her natural course around first towards second.  This would be the definition of obstruction.

Until F3 has the ball it is her duty to avoid contact with the runner no matter what.  Once F3 has the ball it is the runners absolute duty to avoid her.  The only time you will see the duty of the defense to avoid contact waived by the umpire is when there is something intentional by the offense that causes contact.