When I was 11, I was a small kid, but I really liked to catch. There was a ball hit to the infield; I shed my mask; and I came out to straddle the line and block the plate. A big 12 yo was on third, and his coach told him to go. I caught the ball with him about half way, but he just lowered his head and kept coming. He barreled through me, and I ended up 3 feet on the other side of the plate. Held on to the ball, and he was out, but that was one of the worst times I ever had the wind knocked out of me. No one was kicked out of anything.
One of my favorite memories from when I was playing little league was running full speed into the catcher who was fully blocking the plate in an attempt to dislodge the ball and be safe. We both tumbled to the ground, got dusty, and the ball dribbled out his glove. Umpire gave the safe call and the game went on without incident. At the end of the game during the handshake line, me and the catcher had a little moment of mutual respect. I watch this video, and I feel so out of touch with what gets called today. I didn’t see anything malicious at all.
there was nothing malicious in this... but I do see the benefit of the rule change. I dont want my son to be the catch OR the runner to home and both go freight train in.@@stevenbirmingham5531
@@40billwaughthat makes a little more sense. Are you saying that when he extends his arms out like he does that is considered an illegal attempt to essentially “chop” the ball out of the catcher’s control?
I was catching in a similar play, The runner was clearly out, but he held up his elbow and caught me in the side of the head. He damaged my C3 vertebrae. I started to notice it as the years went on. Now, I have to have regular cortisone injections to ease the pain in my right shoulder. That was 50 years ago. So, if you don't think these rules matter, they do.
It could be there is a slide or ejection rule. It may not have to do with how hard the contact is, as much as it was unnecessary. They could be just enforcing a very black and white rule. Kid had all day to slide, and actually had a better chance of avoiding the tag.
Sorry, but I disagree with your last sentence. He was out by a mile and knew it, and the catcher was directly in the path of the plate in a standing position. Where can the runner slide? It would be one thing if this were an outfield throw, where the 3rd based coach is waving you around, you're going in as hard as you can, the throw is occurring behind you, and the catcher has got one leg blocking the plate, but there's still room to get a hand in on the slide. None of that happened here. Catcher already had the ball, was squared up, and had his whole body in the runner's path. And this is after the runner himself - having probably been told to by the 3rd base coach to run on contact - could see the play and knew he was out. So there is no reasonable pathway nor motivation to slide. Now, if there is a "surrender to the tag or slide" rule, that would make more sense. If the rule is that the runner is not allowed simply to run through the play upright if the defender has established himself in the path, then that sounds reasonable, as it was probably created to reduce instances of injuries or fights. But "slide or ejection", if that was indeed the rule, I think should be rethought.
I have not kept up with the rule changes but as a former A/AA catcher, this was a bad call. The catcher went up the base path slightly, that's a no-no.
different sets of rules between scholastic and professional. don't confuse the 2. and if you ask Ray Fosse, who i know personally, he would tell you that was malicious contact, but legal at the time.
Wow times have sure changed. What is this girly ball? I saw two girls colliding. Let me tell you how this would have gone down in he 60s or early 70s.The catcher would have immediately got down to a very low center of gravity and avoided if possible being right on the baseline .The runner would also assume a low center of gravity and impersonate a freight train with his focus on dislodging the ball in the catchers mitt maybe even going a little off baseline to ensure a collision violent enough to dislodge the ball. The catcher anticipating this would get very low at the last second and flip the runner upward using leverage and strength. The runner would sail up into the air about 8 ft .passing up the plate in the process almost manage to land on his feet and immediately look to see if he catcher had dropped the ball. He didn't. About the time the umpire would would give a very heartfelt YOUR OUT!!!!The coaches would nod with approval because both parties executed what they were taught about running into home and all would be well. The players avoiding injury by sheer athleticism and cunning. We grew up playing sandlot football with no pads much the chagrin of our coaches. In that rugged clothes ripping environment a child learns real fast how to engage in a collision and remain unhurt. Man these kids are treated like baby girls so they act like it. Thats a shame too because in my estimation the catcher showed some potential he just was not coached properly and kids need to play more sandlot football and baseball. Every REAL ball player knows the catcher is usually the about the toughest smartest guy on the team.When I was 16 I had a 96MPH fastball. I has catchers that could burn me out from a sitting position.Thats how strong their arms were.
@@mariocanales4735 Totally agree and that's why there should be no debate on this play. No harm no foul. The catcher didn't try to hurt the runner or vice versa
This guy was blocking the plate. He got off easy. He would've been steam rolled back in the day.....and kind of should've been. You don't block the path to the plate.
At first I was going to talk about the misnomer "malicious contact", and say the proper call would be to eject the player for "failure to avoid contact" (book rule) because there was nothing malicious about the contact. The failure to avoid contact rule is that the runner must give himself up in this situation or slide. And then I realized that the runner ACTUALLY gave himself up. So there is no call to be made. Perhaps, I should watch the video again; however, that is my "no call" judgement in real time as a high school certified umpire for 5 years umping an average of 8 hours a week during the season, and participating in about 50 umpiring training events. Aside: There is no "MUST slide" rule because if the runner is compelled to slide AND somebody gets hurt as a result, then there would be liability issues.
@@wymple09 Well, then I suggest you look up the definition of malicious. Failing to avoid and intending to harm are to very different things. Malicious contact implies the runner was intending to harm or injure the catcher. Nothing in this video remotely suggests that.
So, my very first game as a catcher, I was blocking the plate, the runner plows into me and cleans my clock. I get yelled at by my teammates. Last game of the season, we're facing the same team as the earlier incident. Same situation happens, only this time I clean the runner's clock. I get yelled at by my teammates. I didn't play baseball again.
I believe the rule is that you need to slide. And this kid was out by a mile. He shouldn't have done that. He should have run back to 3rd, probably getting out in a rundown.
Is the runner required to stop if the catcher steps into the lane? This wasn't malicious. It was playing to the whistle. The catcher could've dropped the ball.
As a former catcher this was one of the weakest calls I’ve ever seen. There’s very little physical contact in the sport and y’all wanna make it pussified! It’s a damn shame
It's year 2024. First of all the runner is supposed to avoid contact with the catcher. He.tried to knock the ball out of his glove while using a shoving motion. This would also get you ejected from an MLB game. Learn rules and don't talk about sports until you can learn the rules, Karen
@@Brett33 Merely not sliding is not malicious contact. The very definition of malicious is intending to do harm. Nothing about that play suggests that. Unnecessary contact? I suppose, if there's a "slide or avoid" rule. But such rules typically mean just that the runner is automatically out. There should be a separate, higher level for actual malicious contact that should warrant ejection.
@@sethwiley7839 First of all, grow up...there's no need to be rude and call people "Karen" and just because they disagree with the ejection. Second of all, there's no way on God's green earth that this would get you ejected from any MLB game - let alone any minor-league, college, or high school game. The runner did run through the play, sure, and therefore should have been out regardless, by rule, since it's valid to call that unnecessary contact. But I totally disagree with the ejection. Number one, it was not "malicious" at all...nothing about his movements indicated an intent to harm the catcher. And secondly, nothing about his arm movements indicates a motion to try to knock the ball out of his glove. He extended his left arm at the end, but that wasn't to knock the ball out...the catcher, for some reason, wanted to physically try to slow him down even further by sticking his left forearm and left leg out instead of just his glove so the runner would just run into the tag. Should have been runner automatically out, but no ejection (a warning at its absolute worst).
He had the ball, so every right to block the plate. Runner had zero chance and reacted stupidly. Good on the ref. This bad sportsmanship needs to be reined in.
@@wymple09 Yes, he had every right to block the plate, and the runner should have slowed down some more. But I think you're reaching a bit wit the "bad sportsmanship." While it was unnecessary contact, it wasn't "malicious", and there was no need for an ejection there. Runner simply should just have been automatically out. I think both players were a bit chippy there, but nobody was out to hurt anyone.
I did that to a 1st baseman after getting caught in a rundown. I turned to run back to 1st and he was RIGHT THERE on the base path so I leaned into him and sent him rolling. I got back to 1st and the ump ruled me safe but told me, "I don't ever want to see those hands come up like that again." We had a bat around inning and I came up again and got the first pitch in the thigh. I guess someone figured they got some payback, but there was one problem......... I was also my team's starting pitcher that game. Their lead off hitter got a fastball to the ribs that sat him down. I got tossed ans sworn at by their players, coaches and parents. The guy who relived me had the hardest fastball in the league. If their pitcher was going to retaliate he was setting one of his batter's and possibly himself for a world of pain. Nothing happened. We won. Coach told me I was lucky I didn't get suspended. We won the championship that year. 1998. Where did you go............?
Well, failure to "give up or slide" should just mean the runner is simply out, not grounds for ejection. Nothing there comes close to rising to the level of "malicious contact." Sliding really wasn't a realistic option on that play. 2 outs, runner is going on contact...the proper play is for the pitcher to jog toward first and flip the first baseman the ball - not throw home and force the catcher to make the tag. So, it probably didn't even occur to the runner to slide. Throw in the fact that the catcher already caught the ball and was blocking the plate before the runner even gets into the frame, and I think sliding just really isn't in play there. The runner should have just slowed down instead of running through, but I don't think it warranted an ejection.
Good, teach these kids about good sportsmanship. You want to be childish about being tagged out at home? Take it up with your teammate, who hit it right back to the mound for the easy out at home plate. You don't have to act like an aggressive child about it, shoving the catcher's arm aggressively, just because he tagged you out.
I agree with the other comment. Unless it was a slide, or ejection black and white rule, he should have stayed in the game. Still, he had all day to slide and had a better chance of actually avoiding the tag if he had. It was blatant. At least a warning was necessary.
Probably a slide rule. I plaued 14u travel ball in florida in the early 2000s. Catchers would get trucked pretty regularly. They let us play hard then.
@@joeg5414 haha seriously. I remember games when I'd throw BP to the whole team then start on the mound. Pitched a cg once doing that. No pitch counts and pulling pitchers in the second inning lol
The rule is when the catcher has possession of the ball they have full rights to block the bag. If they don't they can't. So the runner pushed him and that was not cool.
Back when I coached the rules were the umpire had the right to call the kid out but not eject for trying to get the catcher to drop the ball. The rule book says it totally an umpires call though.
There is no requirement that the contact has intent to injure. Clearly states runner must slide or avoid contact. Even if catcher is blocking base without ball, this contact shown here would result in an out and ejection. Malicious contact always supersedes obstruction call
Does not require intent to injure. As per the NFHS, (and I assume this game is high school) it simply requires 'excessive contact'. I am not saying that this was excessive, only that the rule does not require intent to injure.
No, not a good call. Nothing there comes close to rising to the level of malicious contact. If there's a rule stating that the runner must slide or give into the tag, that's fine...but such a rule typically just means the runner is automatically out. It shouldn't warrant an ejection.
@larrytowe6672. I don’t know where you played but I’m 50 and I got truck as a catcher more than once and all my coach and dad ever said was toughen up. I played up north.
You dont have to attempt to avoid contact when the defender is in the baseline and trying to tag you. Only when the defender is attempting to play the ball itself does the runner have to avoid.
That's effing weak. Malicious contact? I have seen harder pushes from people trying to board a subway. All you need to see is the catcher throwing his helmet like a brat denied a second donut.
Soft contact, but it was intentional contact for the sake of contact. I dont know how tight/strict umps in this league are expected to call it (i doubt many commenting do) and we also dont know what else happened in this league or game. This doesnt strike me as outrageous, but if given more context, I could be swayed to think this was a bad call.
If the catcher blocks the plate without the ball that should be called obstruction. If the catcher is allowed to block the plate with the ball, then the runner should also have the right to bulldoze him over to try to get to the plate. What I saw here was nothing malicious at all, unless this is a pansy league.
Just like that the stupid comments come out. Catcher had the ball and came up to make a tag. Nothing to warrant an ejection in this video but nothing to warrant a “catcher gets what he gets stupidity” either.
This is youth ball. The rule at all levels of youth ball is that if the catcher has a play on the runner (which he had the ball for like a second and a half for shit sake), the runner must slide or evade. The baseline belongs to the catcher if he has the ball. It doesn't matter what MLB rules say. It's what the rulebook for the league the kids actually exist in says. And all of them say the catcher has the baseline and can't be run over or pushed aside. It's just like these adults that bitch when a high school kid is called for travelling because he does the triple hippity hop fifth gather step to shoot a three. Because at every level of youth ball it's a travel. Doesn't matter what the NBA rulebook says.
This is a bad call. if the runner had decked the catcher then he should be tossed, but this was simply running into him. Bad call. bad baseball, all around ...
It wasn’t malicious contact, the catcher is extended into the baseline. What should be just give them an out? If the wanted a force out, throw to first. Dumb ejection, but even dumber play by pitcher.
I mean I didn’t see anything outta line this is why all sports are getting weak as hell and our kids are getting soft hell I remember when you stand in the baseline with the ball or not is was 50/50 you get ran over and you couldn’t bitch…. Remember major league don’t stand on the tracks when the trains coming through lol
I had the same situation happen years ago.. a uneducated player threw home with 2 outs and my runner plowed the catcher.. yes plowed.. he was totally at fault…. But I told him hey 2 outs going hard on the crack of bat.. he was running hard head down .. cause him along with everyone in the park figured it would be a 1- 3 put out.. instead pitcher threw home to an un expected catcher , he caught it in a vulnerable position basically blocking the path and my runner hit him unknowingly.. he sent him flying .. loss of breath , pretty ugly .. I completely understand the ejection looked intentional.. but in the big picture if your gonna coach teams at any level , teach them the more efficient way of getting and out.. no outs no problem.. my guys still ejected.. but throwing to home for a tag play , with other options that were openly available, you put your teammate in a situation unwarranted..
Runner extended his arms in an attempt to dislodge the ball from the catcher while obviously out IF the ball is not dropped. Definitely a foul that could have caused injury and he should be ejected. Rule 6.01(i)(1) to 6.01(i)(2) 73 (i) Collisions at Home Plate (1) A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher, or otherwise initiate an avoidable collision. If, in the judgment of the umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher in such a manner, the umpire shall declare the runner out (regardless of whether the catcher maintains possession of the ball) Rule 6.01(i)(1) Comment: The failure by the runner to make an effort to touch the plate, the runner’s lowering of the shoulder, or the runner’s pushing through with his hands, elbows or arms, would support a determination that the runner deviated from the pathway in order to initiate contact with the catcher in violation of Rule 6.01(i), or otherwise initiated a collision that could have been avoided.
@@jefffinlayson3002 Read the entirety of my comment and the rule. yes, he did extend his arms and the rule says 'Rule 6.01(i)(1): The failure by the runner to make an effort to touch the plate, the runner’s lowering of the shoulder, OR THE RUNNER'S PUSHING THROUGH WITH HIS HANDS, ELBOWS OR ARMS WOULD SUPPORT A DETERMINATION THAT THE RUNNER DEVIATED FROM THE PATHWAY IN ORDER TO INITIATE CONTACT WITH THE CATCHER in violation of Rule 6.01(i), OR OTHERWISE INITIATED A COLLISION THAT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. The rule clearly states that his actions supported the he violated the rule especially since HE DID INITIATE A COLLISION BY HIS ACTIONS.
As an umpire for many years, and reading that specific rule and its application, you are CORRECT, ejection was warranted. The first duty of an umpire, before the game even starts is to inspect the field for safety, etc., and is protection of the players and to enforce the rules to stop any escalations before they start and to quash and penalize them as soon as they happen to make sure everybody knows it shouldn't have happened in the first place and that it won't happen again. NOTE TO BLEACHER UMPIRE MORONS: These are still teenager minor kids, not adults, not college players, not minor league players, not professional players, BUT MINOR KIDS UNDER 18YO playing a game that in the big scheme of real life means zero - by purposefully extending his arms and throwing up his hands and pushing, the runner could have poked out the catcher's eye even through the facemask, could have pushed the catcher over and had him twist or break an ankle, twist a knee, or any other type of possible permanent injury and YES that has happened. Everybody else that has NEVER been in that situation as an umpire and that spews about being soft, comparing this to what Pete Rose would do, we are making weak kids, blah, blah, blah, can blow. The umpire enforced the rule on the books for that game and protected the players, he fulfilled his duties.
For all the dumb, weird, aggressive shit that happens in Florida, this was really tame. Big L.
im 58 years old, video ended and i never saw a malicious hit did anyone else?
I've watched this video twice, now, and am still waiting for the malicious part.
The catcher didn’t even care, I thought he was gonna get bowled over.
Didn't care? Bro was about 2 seconds from crying 😂
When I was 11, I was a small kid, but I really liked to catch. There was a ball hit to the infield; I shed my mask; and I came out to straddle the line and block the plate. A big 12 yo was on third, and his coach told him to go. I caught the ball with him about half way, but he just lowered his head and kept coming. He barreled through me, and I ended up 3 feet on the other side of the plate. Held on to the ball, and he was out, but that was one of the worst times I ever had the wind knocked out of me. No one was kicked out of anything.
Okay, I give up. Where....EXACTLY....was the "malicious" contact?
The push off, not sliding
@@Subangelis Really?
@@adcolt54 Very likely a slide or ejection rule on any play at homeplate, not uncommon
@@adcolt54yup, really.
@@the_naP chicken shyt call.
Needs more Cow Bell!!😅
I've got a fevahhhhhh.
You're gonna want that cowbell lmao 😢😢😂😂
Winner of “Best Comment”. Thank you Bruce Dickinson.
Good one
I played age group hardball. That wasn't malicious contact. It was a guy out at home. Sheesh.
I don't see an ejection for Malicious contact.
One of my favorite memories from when I was playing little league was running full speed into the catcher who was fully blocking the plate in an attempt to dislodge the ball and be safe. We both tumbled to the ground, got dusty, and the ball dribbled out his glove. Umpire gave the safe call and the game went on without incident.
At the end of the game during the handshake line, me and the catcher had a little moment of mutual respect. I watch this video, and I feel so out of touch with what gets called today. I didn’t see anything malicious at all.
there was nothing malicious in this... but I do see the benefit of the rule change. I dont want my son to be the catch OR the runner to home and both go freight train in.@@stevenbirmingham5531
The improper use of hands is considered cheating. This should have been the reason for ejection.
sounds like you need a helmet to go to the grocery store @@40billwaugh
@@40billwaughthat makes a little more sense. Are you saying that when he extends his arms out like he does that is considered an illegal attempt to essentially “chop” the ball out of the catcher’s control?
I was catching in a similar play, The runner was clearly out, but he held up his elbow and caught me in the side of the head. He damaged my C3 vertebrae. I started to notice it as the years went on. Now, I have to have regular cortisone injections to ease the pain in my right shoulder. That was 50 years ago. So, if you don't think these rules matter, they do.
Soft
Ooh. You should have protected yourself from the incoming runner.
Were you in the lane?
boo hoo. some weren't meant to play.
Yeah I’m sure that’s what caused it… softer than baby turds
The old coach in me would tell the pitcher for a comebacker to the mound with two (2) outs the throw goes to first base.
It could be there is a slide or ejection rule. It may not have to do with how hard the contact is, as much as it was unnecessary. They could be just enforcing a very black and white rule. Kid had all day to slide, and actually had a better chance of avoiding the tag.
Plus, pushing off
It was necessary. He wanted to knock the ball out. This wasn't anything.
A voice of reason in this comment section. Kudos to you, sir.
Sorry, but I disagree with your last sentence. He was out by a mile and knew it, and the catcher was directly in the path of the plate in a standing position. Where can the runner slide? It would be one thing if this were an outfield throw, where the 3rd based coach is waving you around, you're going in as hard as you can, the throw is occurring behind you, and the catcher has got one leg blocking the plate, but there's still room to get a hand in on the slide. None of that happened here. Catcher already had the ball, was squared up, and had his whole body in the runner's path. And this is after the runner himself - having probably been told to by the 3rd base coach to run on contact - could see the play and knew he was out. So there is no reasonable pathway nor motivation to slide. Now, if there is a "surrender to the tag or slide" rule, that would make more sense. If the rule is that the runner is not allowed simply to run through the play upright if the defender has established himself in the path, then that sounds reasonable, as it was probably created to reduce instances of injuries or fights. But "slide or ejection", if that was indeed the rule, I think should be rethought.
@@cmsmhp the rule is actually called slide or avoid. I think that's what the OP meant to say
I have not kept up with the rule changes but as a former A/AA catcher, this was a bad call. The catcher went up the base path slightly, that's a no-no.
Exactly. When I played in the 80's, ( yeah I'm old ) If the catcher moved towards third base he is challenging the runner.
Doesn't matter. You still don't get to shove the catcher.
malicious? somebody needs to watch charlie hustle at the all star game.
different sets of rules between scholastic and professional. don't confuse the 2. and if you ask Ray Fosse, who i know personally, he would tell you that was malicious contact, but legal at the time.
Wow times have sure changed. What is this girly ball? I saw two girls colliding. Let me tell you how this would have gone down in he 60s or early 70s.The catcher would have immediately got down to a very low center of gravity and avoided if possible being right on the baseline .The runner would also assume a low center of gravity and impersonate a freight train with his focus on dislodging the ball in the catchers mitt maybe even going a little off baseline to ensure a collision violent enough to dislodge the ball. The catcher anticipating this would get very low at the last second and flip the runner upward using leverage and strength. The runner would sail up into the air about 8 ft .passing up the plate in the process almost manage to land on his feet and immediately look to see if he catcher had dropped the ball. He didn't. About the time the umpire would would give a very heartfelt YOUR OUT!!!!The coaches would nod with approval because both parties executed what they were taught about running into home and all would be well. The players avoiding injury by sheer athleticism and cunning. We grew up playing sandlot football with no pads much the chagrin of our coaches. In that rugged clothes ripping environment a child learns real fast how to engage in a collision and remain unhurt. Man these kids are treated like baby girls so they act like it. Thats a shame too because in my estimation the catcher showed some potential he just was not coached properly and kids need to play more sandlot football and baseball. Every REAL ball player knows the catcher is usually the about the toughest smartest guy on the team.When I was 16 I had a 96MPH fastball. I has catchers that could burn me out from a sitting position.Thats how strong their arms were.
If you had a 96 mph fastball at 16, you wouldn't be commenting on pony league baseball videos reminiscing about your non existent glory days. 😂🤡
that's a long way to go just to brag about your 96mph fastball.
Getting a flea bite would be more malicious than this play. To me the catcher initiated the contact
Although I agree that this is not malicious contact, but the catcher does have to make a tag so he has to initiate.
@@mariocanales4735 THANK YOU!!
@@mariocanales4735 Totally agree and that's why there should be no debate on this play. No harm no foul. The catcher didn't try to hurt the runner or vice versa
That's his job as long as he has the ball, which he certainly does.
This guy was blocking the plate. He got off easy. He would've been steam rolled back in the day.....and kind of should've been. You don't block the path to the plate.
At first I was going to talk about the misnomer "malicious contact", and say the proper call would be to eject the player for "failure to avoid contact" (book rule) because there was nothing malicious about the contact.
The failure to avoid contact rule is that the runner must give himself up in this situation or slide.
And then I realized that the runner ACTUALLY gave himself up. So there is no call to be made. Perhaps, I should watch the video again; however, that is my "no call" judgement in real time as a high school certified umpire for 5 years umping an average of 8 hours a week during the season, and participating in about 50 umpiring training events.
Aside: There is no "MUST slide" rule because if the runner is compelled to slide AND somebody gets hurt as a result, then there would be liability issues.
Failure to avoid sounds like malicious to me
@@wymple09 Well, then I suggest you look up the definition of malicious. Failing to avoid and intending to harm are to very different things. Malicious contact implies the runner was intending to harm or injure the catcher. Nothing in this video remotely suggests that.
The catcher is hot and didn't even seem he cared one bit.
What hit?
With two outs and a come backer, the pitcher goes home? That’s the really problem here.
Indeed
It's his choice. Nothing illegal about throwing home.
I’m not sure anyone said throwing home was illegal. It wasn’t particularly smart though.
Really?
What if he threw to 1st and the 1st basemen whiffed the catch? Now you have a run. I'm not even a baseball guy and I can see that.
As catcher I got hit hard in high school many years ago. My left shoulder was in pain for years.
Then don't play catcher.
@@stephengrantham6877 the guy who hit me didn't play anything for about 3 months. Broke his shoulder.
That was pretty mild contact for an ejection.
Ray Charles could see the extra elbow/forearm to the back. Good call.
Yeah but I asked him, and he said that he didn't have his sunglasses on at the time and missed it.
Lol@@jaxonboys3366
Even Ray Charles could see that it was the runner - not the catcher - that was ejected. So no, not a good call.
So, my very first game as a catcher, I was blocking the plate, the runner plows into me and cleans my clock. I get yelled at by my teammates. Last game of the season, we're facing the same team as the earlier incident. Same situation happens, only this time I clean the runner's clock. I get yelled at by my teammates. I didn't play baseball again.
That was pretty borderline to be called "malicious contact". I probably would've just let that one go as 'just another play'.
That’s not the spirit of the rule. Should have warned the runner.
I believe the rule is that you need to slide. And this kid was out by a mile. He shouldn't have done that. He should have run back to 3rd, probably getting out in a rundown.
This can’t be for real?
No malicious contact here. Most likely enforcing the anti-trucking rule at home plate. Also, percentages dictate a throw to first rather than to home.
Is the runner required to stop if the catcher steps into the lane? This wasn't malicious. It was playing to the whistle. The catcher could've dropped the ball.
This is not an ejection...this is a talk to
That ump is softer then a My Pillow
Good to see the Umpire really working hard behind the plate...
tell me about it. could he look any more disinterested in the game or making an effort?
Why didn't he make a a call? Then he takes his mask off with his right hand. This umpire needs additional training.
Needs to get the glue off the bottom of his shoes!
they're probably just happy to get someone to ump the game
Can we talk about those shorts the coaches were wearing lololol
I didn't see any Malicious contact?
You are TOTALLY allowed to try and knock the ball out of his hand. These umps need to re-read the rules!
You can’t throw a elbow and push your hands into a player which he didn’t do😂
As a former catcher this was one of the weakest calls I’ve ever seen. There’s very little physical contact in the sport and y’all wanna make it pussified! It’s a damn shame
What an absolute joke
Didn’t see an ejection and definitely did not see any malicious contact.
Not sliding and running into the catcher was the malicious contact, umpire told the coach, coach told the player he was ejected .
It's year 2024. First of all the runner is supposed to avoid contact with the catcher. He.tried to knock the ball out of his glove while using a shoving motion. This would also get you ejected from an MLB game. Learn rules and don't talk about sports until you can learn the rules, Karen
@@Brett33 Merely not sliding is not malicious contact. The very definition of malicious is intending to do harm. Nothing about that play suggests that. Unnecessary contact? I suppose, if there's a "slide or avoid" rule. But such rules typically mean just that the runner is automatically out. There should be a separate, higher level for actual malicious contact that should warrant ejection.
@@sethwiley7839 First of all, grow up...there's no need to be rude and call people "Karen" and just because they disagree with the ejection. Second of all, there's no way on God's green earth that this would get you ejected from any MLB game - let alone any minor-league, college, or high school game. The runner did run through the play, sure, and therefore should have been out regardless, by rule, since it's valid to call that unnecessary contact. But I totally disagree with the ejection. Number one, it was not "malicious" at all...nothing about his movements indicated an intent to harm the catcher. And secondly, nothing about his arm movements indicates a motion to try to knock the ball out of his glove. He extended his left arm at the end, but that wasn't to knock the ball out...the catcher, for some reason, wanted to physically try to slow him down even further by sticking his left forearm and left leg out instead of just his glove so the runner would just run into the tag. Should have been runner automatically out, but no ejection (a warning at its absolute worst).
So the catcher can crowd the plate whether he has the ball or not and you have to politely ask him to move
He had the ball, so every right to block the plate. Runner had zero chance and reacted stupidly. Good on the ref. This bad sportsmanship needs to be reined in.
No. That entitles you to take a cheap shot because you were out anyway.
@@wymple09 Yes, he had every right to block the plate, and the runner should have slowed down some more. But I think you're reaching a bit wit the "bad sportsmanship." While it was unnecessary contact, it wasn't "malicious", and there was no need for an ejection there. Runner simply should just have been automatically out. I think both players were a bit chippy there, but nobody was out to hurt anyone.
I did that to a 1st baseman after getting caught in a rundown. I turned to run back to 1st and he was RIGHT THERE on the base path so I leaned into him and sent him rolling. I got back to 1st and the ump ruled me safe but told me, "I don't ever want to see those hands come up like that again." We had a bat around inning and I came up again and got the first pitch in the thigh. I guess someone figured they got some payback, but there was one problem.........
I was also my team's starting pitcher that game. Their lead off hitter got a fastball to the ribs that sat him down. I got tossed ans sworn at by their players, coaches and parents. The guy who relived me had the hardest fastball in the league. If their pitcher was going to retaliate he was setting one of his batter's and possibly himself for a world of pain.
Nothing happened. We won. Coach told me I was lucky I didn't get suspended. We won the championship that year. 1998. Where did you go............?
Sure
Call the police! That runner needs to go to jail. He's worse than Hitler.
The only thing i see is that at that age any play at a bag you need to slide. Barely touched him.
Ridiculous no wonder our nation is like it is
Nice to see an umpire that is so lazy he can't remove his mask after the ball was put into play.
I had a guy send me into the backstop, I held onto the ball. This was nothing.
Good call
Give up or slide. It wasn't a force, so had he slid, he might have been safe.
Well, failure to "give up or slide" should just mean the runner is simply out, not grounds for ejection. Nothing there comes close to rising to the level of "malicious contact." Sliding really wasn't a realistic option on that play. 2 outs, runner is going on contact...the proper play is for the pitcher to jog toward first and flip the first baseman the ball - not throw home and force the catcher to make the tag. So, it probably didn't even occur to the runner to slide. Throw in the fact that the catcher already caught the ball and was blocking the plate before the runner even gets into the frame, and I think sliding just really isn't in play there. The runner should have just slowed down instead of running through, but I don't think it warranted an ejection.
catcher ate that truck tho, gg?
looks like this area is in need of barbers
Good, teach these kids about good sportsmanship. You want to be childish about being tagged out at home? Take it up with your teammate, who hit it right back to the mound for the easy out at home plate. You don't have to act like an aggressive child about it, shoving the catcher's arm aggressively, just because he tagged you out.
I got nothing. Having done NFHS and travel ball for 30 years this is nothing more than incidental contact.
No. It’s more than incidental. He does bring his hands up with a bit of a push. Not worthy of an ejection though.
I agree with the other comment. Unless it was a slide, or ejection black and white rule, he should have stayed in the game. Still, he had all day to slide and had a better chance of actually avoiding the tag if he had. It was blatant. At least a warning was necessary.
Hard and fast rule, has been for a decade. Give or slide. It your umps haven't enforced it, they you've had bad umps.
@@brianlogsdon3879 if play is at home. 0:06 his back leg off home plate he is in the base line. Give or slide does not apply.
He literally pushed the catcher. That is cause for ejection.
Forfeit or slide. Probably should have warned both teams before an ejection.
Catcher is up the baseline, makes no sense to slide. The runner was in the right
@@rayelee1301 he runner must either slide or attempt to avoid contact. The runner should be called out.
Terrible call
Probably a slide rule. I plaued 14u travel ball in florida in the early 2000s. Catchers would get trucked pretty regularly. They let us play hard then.
I played in the late 90s. Completely different then. We were encouraged to
@@joeg5414 haha seriously. I remember games when I'd throw BP to the whole team then start on the mound. Pitched a cg once doing that. No pitch counts and pulling pitchers in the second inning lol
Those idiots with the cowbells ruin the game for everybody.
Baseball has gone to hell
The rule is when the catcher has possession of the ball they have full rights to block the bag. If they don't they can't. So the runner pushed him and that was not cool.
And the runner has full rights to get to the plate..contact is just fine, especially when the catcher is in the baseline
@@rayelee1301 Yes agreed only issue is that the runner shoved him away which is not allowed
That’s that malicious contact part
Back when I coached the rules were the umpire had the right to call the kid out but not eject for trying to get the catcher to drop the ball. The rule book says it totally an umpires call though.
@@auranost have you watched baseball or softball ever? Runner did what she had the right to do.
Weak call. Not malicious. No intent to injure. WEAK.
He pushed his hands through the catcher which is against the rules
There is no requirement that the contact has intent to injure. Clearly states runner must slide or avoid contact. Even if catcher is blocking base without ball, this contact shown here would result in an out and ejection.
Malicious contact always supersedes obstruction call
Does not require intent to injure. As per the NFHS, (and I assume this game is high school) it simply requires 'excessive contact'.
I am not saying that this was excessive, only that the rule does not require intent to injure.
@@bauerj3398 Intent to injure or cause harm is the definition of malicious. So yes the rule requires intent to injure.
That wasn’t much of anything.
I just hope everyone got a trophy
I wouldn't have an ejection. Was that Malicious? Did he mean to injure? Surer he could have avoided the tag or slid.... but I got an out, only.
Good call, no place
Good call...............
No, not a good call. Nothing there comes close to rising to the level of malicious contact. If there's a rule stating that the runner must slide or give into the tag, that's fine...but such a rule typically just means the runner is automatically out. It shouldn't warrant an ejection.
When we played, anything or anyone in the basepath was fair game...
You must be 100, because they hasn't been allowed for a long time,vim 53 and it wasn't allowed then.
@larrytowe6672. I don’t know where you played but I’m 50 and I got truck as a catcher more than once and all my coach and dad ever said was toughen up. I played up north.
You must have played in the pansy league.
@@SmokEatr73 nope , travel ball. You have a thug mindset. Try not to be stupid, to late
@@SmokEatr73 I'm in Ohio, pretty good ball here my man
Piss poor call.
I would always teach my kids to throw to first on that type of play, if there were two outs.
Agreed. Take two big steps toward first, and underhand the ball. Bad coaching.
I don't see malicious contact here. I would call the runner out for not attempting to avoid contact, but I would not eject him.
He pushed out with his hands and he did not attempt to avoid contact. Textbook malicious contact.
@@daleksupreme8822 Malicious contact means he was attempting to injure the catcher. That is not what happened.
Umpire should have taken mask off to get better view.
@@marylozano-fk9pw Yes, he should have.
You dont have to attempt to avoid contact when the defender is in the baseline and trying to tag you. Only when the defender is attempting to play the ball itself does the runner have to avoid.
I was a catcher, no issues for me!
FACT I have seen thousand times harder hits in Co-Ed Church League Softball that I used to be in.
he barely ran into him. catcher was being a pansy
What a crock !
Blocking plate. Lightly runs into him. Hilarious.
Coach’s fault for not teach players how to slide.
Malicious? Hell, Pete Rose made harder contact than that probably 20 times a year back in the day.
Huge difference between ML rules and Amateur rules. But this is not malicious.
0:06 catcher steps off homeplate up the baseline. how is this an ejection? bad call by the umps, maybe they should learn the rules of baseball. wow.
The wusification of baseball
Umpire dead wrong
Not sliding was malicious in that play, lol.
LOL...yeah, right.
I played in the 60's and watched the pussification of America happen. Sad.
My thoughts exactly. Someone slightly ran into someone. Nobody was hurt. Who cares!
ticky tack........
That's effing weak. Malicious contact? I have seen harder pushes from people trying to board a subway.
All you need to see is the catcher throwing his helmet like a brat denied a second donut.
It's ok, it's just a game, and not a very important one at that...
Oh come on.
Soft contact, but it was intentional contact for the sake of contact.
I dont know how tight/strict umps in this league are expected to call it (i doubt many commenting do) and we also dont know what else happened in this league or game.
This doesnt strike me as outrageous, but if given more context, I could be swayed to think this was a bad call.
Variation of the Truck Play. Yeah, I've seen a lot worse, but the ejection is correct.
Disagree. Didn't rise the level of a Truck Play. No blatant attempt to cause harm or even dislodge the ball.
With 2 outs just go to first
If the catcher blocks the plate without the ball that should be called obstruction. If the catcher is allowed to block the plate with the ball, then the runner should also have the right to bulldoze him over to try to get to the plate. What I saw here was nothing malicious at all, unless this is a pansy league.
Not a forced runner so WTH the catcher had to tag the runner so how is that malicious??? It’s not !!!
If the catcher wants to stand in the way that's what happens.
Just like that the stupid comments come out. Catcher had the ball and came up to make a tag. Nothing to warrant an ejection in this video but nothing to warrant a “catcher gets what he gets stupidity” either.
This is youth ball. The rule at all levels of youth ball is that if the catcher has a play on the runner (which he had the ball for like a second and a half for shit sake), the runner must slide or evade. The baseline belongs to the catcher if he has the ball. It doesn't matter what MLB rules say. It's what the rulebook for the league the kids actually exist in says. And all of them say the catcher has the baseline and can't be run over or pushed aside. It's just like these adults that bitch when a high school kid is called for travelling because he does the triple hippity hop fifth gather step to shoot a three. Because at every level of youth ball it's a travel. Doesn't matter what the NBA rulebook says.
This is a bad call. if the runner had decked the catcher then he should be tossed, but this was simply running into him. Bad call. bad baseball, all around ...
Your not supposed to stand directly in the base line, if you do then they have the right to hit you
yes exactly. 0:06 foot off plate walking up the base line. I have no idea what these other comments defending this call are going on about.
Tag with 2 hands not 1
It wasn’t malicious contact, the catcher is extended into the baseline. What should be just give them an out? If the wanted a force out, throw to first. Dumb ejection, but even dumber play by pitcher.
No, no he’s not 😂
SOFTball?
That was weak!
I mean I didn’t see anything outta line this is why all sports are getting weak as hell and our kids are getting soft hell I remember when you stand in the baseline with the ball or not is was 50/50 you get ran over and you couldn’t bitch…. Remember major league don’t stand on the tracks when the trains coming through lol
People are soft these days
I had the same situation happen years ago.. a uneducated player threw home with 2 outs and my runner plowed the catcher.. yes plowed..
he was totally at fault….
But I told him hey 2 outs going hard on the crack of bat.. he was running hard head down .. cause him along with everyone in the park figured it would be a 1- 3 put out.. instead pitcher threw home to an un expected catcher , he caught it in a vulnerable position basically blocking the path and my runner hit him unknowingly.. he sent him flying .. loss of breath , pretty ugly .. I completely understand the ejection looked intentional.. but in the big picture if your gonna coach teams at any level , teach them the more efficient way of getting and out.. no outs no problem.. my guys still ejected.. but throwing to home for a tag play , with other options that were openly available, you put your teammate in a situation unwarranted..
The kid doesn’t know what he doesn’t know. That’s on the coach.
Runner extended his arms in an attempt to dislodge the ball from the catcher while obviously out IF the ball is not dropped. Definitely a foul that could have caused injury and he should be ejected. Rule 6.01(i)(1) to 6.01(i)(2) 73 (i) Collisions at Home Plate (1) A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher, or otherwise initiate an avoidable collision. If, in the judgment of the umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher in such a manner, the umpire shall declare the runner out (regardless of whether the catcher maintains possession of the ball) Rule 6.01(i)(1) Comment: The failure by the runner to make an effort to touch the plate, the runner’s lowering of the shoulder, or the runner’s pushing through with his hands, elbows or arms, would support a determination that the runner deviated from the pathway in order to initiate contact with the catcher in violation of Rule 6.01(i), or otherwise initiated a collision that could have been avoided.
So, in other words, he didnt violate the rule. Thanks!
@@rayelee1301 and what rule are you reading? You are welcome !!!
The runner did extend his arms into the catcher's glove as you say but he did not change his path, etc.
@@jefffinlayson3002 Read the entirety of my comment and the rule. yes, he did extend his arms and the rule says 'Rule 6.01(i)(1): The failure by the runner to make an effort to touch the plate, the runner’s lowering of the shoulder, OR THE RUNNER'S PUSHING THROUGH WITH HIS HANDS, ELBOWS OR ARMS WOULD SUPPORT A DETERMINATION THAT THE RUNNER DEVIATED FROM THE PATHWAY IN ORDER TO INITIATE CONTACT WITH THE CATCHER in violation of Rule 6.01(i), OR OTHERWISE INITIATED A COLLISION THAT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. The rule clearly states that his actions supported the he violated the rule especially since HE DID INITIATE A COLLISION BY HIS ACTIONS.
As an umpire for many years, and reading that specific rule and its application, you are CORRECT, ejection was warranted. The first duty of an umpire, before the game even starts is to inspect the field for safety, etc., and is protection of the players and to enforce the rules to stop any escalations before they start and to quash and penalize them as soon as they happen to make sure everybody knows it shouldn't have happened in the first place and that it won't happen again.
NOTE TO BLEACHER UMPIRE MORONS: These are still teenager minor kids, not adults, not college players, not minor league players, not professional players, BUT MINOR KIDS UNDER 18YO playing a game that in the big scheme of real life means zero - by purposefully extending his arms and throwing up his hands and pushing, the runner could have poked out the catcher's eye even through the facemask, could have pushed the catcher over and had him twist or break an ankle, twist a knee, or any other type of possible permanent injury and YES that has happened. Everybody else that has NEVER been in that situation as an umpire and that spews about being soft, comparing this to what Pete Rose would do, we are making weak kids, blah, blah, blah, can blow. The umpire enforced the rule on the books for that game and protected the players, he fulfilled his duties.