Likely on purpose. Catcher hits batter in head.

[MoJo]

Y

Here is the thing with that ... How is the umpire to know about the history? In MLB, umpires get a Head's Up Report pre-game about any potential issues with the teams playing that day. As high school umpires, we're lucky if we even know who the visiting team is that day.

Agreed that I don't like the look the umpires are giving off during this. I'm also not sure why they are wearing college uniforms for a high school game, especially if it is post-season.

Small town, low population county....word gets out fast.
Bet the ump group is small, share game info, and other communication. Was there an ump assigned to multiple games McCamey High played.....probably?

Look how fast this story has hit the internet...on every softball moms FB and is an auto fill at Google in one day.

 

[Agcy]

Y

Small town, low population county....word gets out fast.
Bet the ump group is small, share game info, and other communication. Was there an ump assigned to multiple games McCamey High played.....probably?

Look how fast this story has hit the internet...on every softball moms FB and is an auto fill at Google in one day.

A lot of presumptions there...

 

[NJZoo]

Also, IF this is a play the coach instructed the catcher to make to draw an interference call, wouldn't you have your catcher throw down from her knees into the hip/body area of the batter? Why would you ever tell your player to throw at the head of another player? It makes it even more infuriating.

 

[schwabach]

Players are fully capable of coming up with bad ideas all on their own and if the coach doesn't deal with that sort of thing immediately, then you end up with incidents like this.

We had a rec coach teaching 10U's the Ty Cobb slide. Fortunately some other parents set him straight.

 

[MightyMO]

Y

Small town, low population county....word gets out fast.
Bet the ump group is small, share game info, and other communication. Was there an ump assigned to multiple games McCamey High played.....probably?

Look how fast this story has hit the internet...on every softball moms FB and is an auto fill at Google in one day.

Having 2 DDs that played in small towns in low population counties, I can tell you that you take what you can get for umpires. There aren't a lot in the area that handle the games. They probably pull from all over.

That being said, I thought this was some sort of post season game?

 

[bmwbykrydr]

I've just got to weigh in on this and I know I'm going to get flamed for it by those that don't read the whole post. This is different from last fall's hot topic when a base runner ran from second to home on a bunt, missing third by several feet. Running the bases out of order is expressly prohibited by rule, therefor completely illegal. I don't know which sanctioning body these teams are playing under, but I think pretty much all of them have a similar rule here.

Section 6-R - The batter is out when hindering the catcher from catching or throwing the ball by stepping out of the batter’s box. (this implies with both feet) Runners return to the base they occupied at the time of the pitch.

Yes, the catcher has been taught to do this because the rule allows it, it is legal. The rule does not require proof that the catcher is trying to throw to a base, it does not require that there be a play at that base or any base as long as there is a runner on base. The whole point of this rule is to prevent the offense from interfering with the catcher and her ability to make a play. We all know if this rule wasn't in place that you'd have batter after batter jumping up and down waving their bat in front of a catcher trying to knock down a throw to 3B.

The offense isn't helpless here. WHY IS THIS BATTER LEAVING THE BOX WITH RUNNER'S TO PROTECT!! If she is not swinging at a ball, that is her only other job, PROTECT HER RUNNERS. She should not be going anywhere until the ball is in the circle. That is how the offense can legally interfere with the defense, by staying in the box and making the catcher throw around the batter. If the catcher hits the batter in this situation the ball is live and runners can advance. If the umpire feels the contact was intentional or malicious, now the umpire can eject the catcher.

I do teach my catcher's to watch for this situation and they are taught not to throw around the batter IF THE BATTER IS ACTUALLY IN THE PATH OF THE THROW. This is my own addendum to the rule which does not make this distinction, I do. You only need to miss the batter by an inch, make the throw, make the play. If it hits her helmet, that's why she's wearing one.

I'll refer to the two batter's separately. One batter has a light helmet, the other she has a dark helmet.

Dark helmet batter: Bases are loaded. If you watch closely, the batter IS NOT OUT OF THE BOX when the catcher throws the ball. Her right foot can be seen between the ump and catcher as she peels her toes up. She is stepping out of the box, I DON'T KNOW WHY, but she is not out of the box. I think the catcher should have been ejected on that play because the batter is in the box.

Light helmet batter: Runner at 2B. Batter is slightly more out of the box. She has picked her left foot up and has left the box. By rule, this is legal because of that. The umpires signals dead ball so he feels she was out of the box as well. This is where my personal addendum comes into play. The catcher knows the runner is not advancing, there is no one to throw to at the bag, don't throw. Also, there is no need to throw the ball that hard. The catcher nearly takes the batters helmet off. A simple wrist flick would generate the same outcome. There is no need to throw at the batters face. She has a face guard but throw a little low and you've hit her throat.

In the end, I do not fault the catcher with the light helmet batter, I do with the dark helmet batter. I find more fault with the coach that didn't put limits on the catcher's decision making, even though she doesn't have to, but that's just me. There is a lot of fault on the offense for leaving the box at all.

 

[Mike Hurd]

I've just got to weigh in on this and I know I'm going to get flamed for it by those that don't read the whole post. This is different from last fall's hot topic when a base runner ran from second to home on a bunt, missing third by several feet. Running the bases out of order is expressly prohibited by rule, therefor completely illegal. I don't know which sanctioning body these teams are playing under, but I think pretty much all of them have a similar rule here.

Section 6-R - The batter is out when hindering the catcher from catching or throwing the ball by stepping out of the batter’s box. (this implies with both feet) Runners return to the base they occupied at the time of the pitch.

Yes, the catcher has been taught to do this because the rule allows it, it is legal. The rule does not require proof that the catcher is trying to throw to a base, it does not require that there be a play at that base or any base as long as there is a runner on base. The whole point of this rule is to prevent the offense from interfering with the catcher and her ability to make a play. We all know if this rule wasn't in place that you'd have batter after batter jumping up and down waving their bat in front of a catcher trying to knock down a throw to 3B.

The offense isn't helpless here. WHY IS THIS BATTER LEAVING THE BOX WITH RUNNER'S TO PROTECT!! If she is not swinging at a ball, that is her only other job, PROTECT HER RUNNERS. She should not be going anywhere until the ball is in the circle. That is how the offense can legally interfere with the defense, by staying in the box and making the catcher throw around the batter. If the catcher hits the batter in this situation the ball is live and runners can advance. If the umpire feels the contact was intentional or malicious, now the umpire can eject the catcher.

I do teach my catcher's to watch for this situation and they are taught not to throw around the batter IF THE BATTER IS ACTUALLY IN THE PATH OF THE THROW. This is my own addendum to the rule which does not make this distinction, I do. You only need to miss the batter by an inch, make the throw, make the play. If it hits her helmet, that's why she's wearing one.

I'll refer to the two batter's separately. One batter has a light helmet, the other she has a dark helmet.

Dark helmet batter: Bases are loaded. If you watch closely, the batter IS NOT OUT OF THE BOX when the catcher throws the ball. Her right foot can be seen between the ump and catcher as she peels her toes up. She is stepping out of the box, I DON'T KNOW WHY, but she is not out of the box. I think the catcher should have been ejected on that play because the batter is in the box.

Light helmet batter: Runner at 2B. Batter is slightly more out of the box. She has picked her left foot up and has left the box. By rule, this is legal because of that. The umpires signals dead ball so he feels she was out of the box as well. This is where my personal addendum comes into play. The catcher knows the runner is not advancing, there is no one to throw to at the bag, don't throw. Also, there is no need to throw the ball that hard. The catcher nearly takes the batters helmet off. A simple wrist flick would generate the same outcome. There is no need to throw at the batters face. She has a face guard but throw a little low and you've hit her throat.

In the end, I do not fault the catcher with the light helmet batter, I do with the dark helmet batter. I find more fault with the coach that didn't put limits on the catcher's decision making, even though she doesn't have to, but that's just me. There is a lot of fault on the offense for leaving the box at all.

Batter does NOT have to be completely out of the box. The batter can be called for "any movement" while standing in the box. For it to be interference there has to be a play that can be made. If there is no runner on 3B, no runner going to 3B, etc, then interference cannot be called.

 

[Rolling Hard]

"I do teach my catcher's to watch for this situation "
" If it hits her helmet, that's why she's wearing one."
"A simple wrist flick would generate the same outcome. There is no need to throw at the batters face. "
You are the companionate coach-lite version of horrible coaching.

 

[MattG]

I was at the game. My DD plays for the team that was thrown at. Both times before it happened the coach says cowboy loudly, it was a coached play to try and get a interference call with no regards for a student athletes safety. The parents of that team were very disgusting as well. The coach should have been ejected as well as the catcher. No place in sports for this period!!! The girl that got hit the second time has a chipped tooth and swollen jaw from how hard the face mask slammed into her face. This was a 2nd round playoff game and we were pretty far from home so the umpire crew was not from our area. DD's team beat them twice and we get to move on.

 

[Cannonball]

Do you have any idea how dangerous this type of thinking really is? I've coached 39 years and have never seen anyone coach this. You bet your a.. if this happened to one of my players, me and the other coach will go at it. You talk about rules. There are other issues including the idea of sportsmanship that we, as coaches are supposed to teach. BTW, you mention that the girl has a helmet on. How do you know if that child has ever had a concussion? How do you know if they have any other health concerns? If your catcher hits that kid in the throat then they could kill that child.

While I wouldn't have wanted to see it happen, had some catcher done that to my dd, I am betting that they would either be body slammed or knocked out by her. She was never a little child. What would you say when something like that happened?

Would you coach your fielders to knock the heck out of a player with a tag play even when they are safe and the play on them is late? That might be within the rules but shows a lack of class and sportsmanship. There are so many instances where we can say we did something within the rules but violate the spirit of the game. Members here might remember what happened when a coach "playing within the rules" tried to have his players take out my dd. Bad idea. (Ken Krause (Admin) and I shared pm on what happened there. It was not pretty.)

(Note, it is not my intent to sound like a BA. However, there are members on this site who know me and are from my area. I am sure that they have heard about how I really am when it comes to protecting my kids.)

Darrell Butler