PDA

View Full Version : Umpire gets beaned in High School game


WizardsofOzzie
06-05-2008, 10:00 AM
Apparently the pitcher/catcher weren't happy with the home plate umpire was calling the game, so they did the most logical thing. Fire a fastball right at his head :o: Link to story (http://www.wsbtv.com/sports/16478555/detail.html)

PH_2itdz-1E

Iwritecode
06-05-2008, 10:08 AM
So if you intentionally throw at a batter who is wearing no protective equipment you might get a warning or possibly thrown out of the game.

If you throw at an umpire who is wearing a chest protector and face mask you get "investigated"?

:scratch:

daveeym
06-05-2008, 11:52 AM
So if you intentionally throw at a batter who is wearing no protective equipment you might get a warning or possibly thrown out of the game.

If you throw at an umpire who is wearing a chest protector and face mask you get "investigated"?

:scratch: Poor job of acting by the catcher. Pretty nice aim by the pitcher considering the umps movement. Probably wasn't even breaking 80 though. Probably worth a good 5-10 game suspension, unless they were getting knocked out of the playoffs there.

PatK
06-05-2008, 12:04 PM
Poor job of acting by the catcher. Pretty nice aim by the pitcher considering the umps movement. Probably wasn't even breaking 80 though. Probably worth a good 5-10 game suspension, unless they were getting knocked out of the playoffs there.

they were- they lost 13-1

btrain929
06-05-2008, 12:12 PM
Poor job of acting by the catcher. Pretty nice aim by the pitcher considering the umps movement. Probably wasn't even breaking 80 though. Probably worth a good 5-10 game suspension, unless they were getting knocked out of the playoffs there.

There was a runner on 2nd, they clearly got crossed up by the pitching signs...

BRDSR
06-05-2008, 12:27 PM
So if you intentionally throw at a batter who is wearing no protective equipment you might get a warning or possibly thrown out of the game.

If you throw at an umpire who is wearing a chest protector and face mask you get "investigated"?

:scratch:

There is a legal difference between injuring someone in the course of an athletic contest and injuring someone outside the bounds of the athletic contest. It is most relevant in hockey.

In addition to being investigated by "state athletic officials," the pitcher and catcher should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Can't have this kind of behavior in (any, but especially) high school sports.

Zisk77
06-05-2008, 12:50 PM
No place for that in HS sports.

However: when I was playing semi-pro baseball a similar thing happened. We were supposed to play in a tournement in Evansville Indiana. The directions we had weren't the best and we kept missing a sideroad. There are like 5 million baseball fields in that town and we stopped and a bunch of them thinking we were at the right place.

Eventually we get to the right place about 15 min. late and the umps are pissed. So of course our pitcher goes out their and walks the bases loaded and 3 runs in. He was throwing pitches right down the middle...ball. Ok unmps message recieved. Finally our catcher goes out and says your going to cross me up and hit the ump in the chest with a high fb...he did...the next pitch was a strike the game returned to normal (miraculously we didn't walk another batter) unfortunately we lost 7-5.

Was it the right thing to do? Probably not. Of course it wasn't right what the ump was doing either. They didn't seem to care what throwing 200 pitches would have an effect on our pitchers arm.

fquaye149
06-05-2008, 12:58 PM
So if you intentionally throw at a batter who is wearing no protective equipment you might get a warning or possibly thrown out of the game.

If you throw at an umpire who is wearing a chest protector and face mask you get "investigated"?

:scratch:


Though it's illegal, a batter is cognizant that at any time he might be hit.

An umpire, on the other hand, is supposed to stay in the box, trusting only that the catcher will block the ball from him.

A batter is not helpless, that is, whereas an umpire, despite his padding, is

BRDSR
06-05-2008, 01:05 PM
Though it's illegal, a batter is cognizant that at any time he might be hit.

An umpire, on the other hand, is supposed to stay in the box, trusting only that the catcher will block the ball from him.

A batter is not helpless, that is, whereas an umpire, despite his padding, is

This is an interesting legal question, actually. Is it illegal to intentionally bean a batter during the course of a baseball game? Obviously it's "illegal" within the rules of the game and the punishment is awarding the batter first base. However, it has been widely regarded for more than a century as an existing, if not legitimate, strategy to be employed by the pitcher and his team. Therefore, being intentionally beaned may constitute an injury within the limits of the athletic competition.

On the other hand, intentionally throwing a baseball at the umpire is quite obviously battery.

KenBerryGrab
06-05-2008, 01:09 PM
Those kids should be banned from further competition.

fquaye149
06-05-2008, 01:14 PM
This is an interesting legal question, actually. Is it illegal to intentionally bean a batter during the course of a baseball game? Obviously it's "illegal" within the rules of the game and the punishment is awarding the batter first base. However, it has been widely regarded for more than a century as an existing, if not legitimate, strategy to be employed by the pitcher and his team. Therefore, being intentionally beaned may constitute an injury within the limits of the athletic competition.

On the other hand, intentionally throwing a baseball at the umpire is quite obviously battery.

Depends on the level and how seriously they're injured.

That is to say, it's "illegal" both in the rules of the game and in the rules of society, for a hitter to charge the mound and hit a pitcher after he gets beaned. However, no one ever seems to get in trouble for that.

A good example of that would be Todd Bertuzzi's tackle of ...the name escapes me...for the avalanche.

He was looking at legal action even though that was during the course of a game.

So I guess what would probably happen is that if it were high school or below and the hitter got injured (or had litiginous parents) the pitcher (or coach) could get sued and probably would.

I don't know how exactly the law treats it, but I'm pretty sure that's the way it works practically, if not literally

KenBerryGrab
06-05-2008, 01:17 PM
Does anyone know how that case turned out a few years back when the high school hockey player took a run at a kid from behind and seriously hurt him?

voodoochile
06-05-2008, 01:21 PM
There is a legal difference between injuring someone in the course of an athletic contest and injuring someone outside the bounds of the athletic contest. It is most relevant in hockey.

In addition to being investigated by "state athletic officials," the pitcher and catcher should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Can't have this kind of behavior in (any, but especially) high school sports.

It's really a disciplinary situation, IMO. Nothing to prosecute really. It's simple assault and probably wouldn't even rise to battery given the ump's protective gear.

The pitcher and catcher should be held accountable and not allowed to pitch next season for example or suspended from all team sports for the year. I am sure if either one of them is a scholarship athlete, they will end up getting those scholarships revoked, at least I would hope so. Community college instead of a 4 year ride would be a great punishment for their stupidity.

Luke
06-05-2008, 01:32 PM
Wow. I don't know if anyone picked up on all the fans at the end of the video that were applauding. Way to set an example.

There's a way to tell the ump he stinks. You say "You're awful." Call him a couple four letter words, let him run you and hit the showers. You don't have to endanger him.

Zisk77
06-05-2008, 01:33 PM
Many Hs have a code of conduct. This would seem to be a violation of said code. The school should disciplene this. One question I would have was why did their coach allow this to happen? if he was ignorant to the event was going to happen, did he immediately remove the players from the game and disciplene them? If not, why?

I had kids want to throw at opposing players for things they did to our team (trucking the catcher which is illegal IHSA baseball, hitting our players, etc). I made it clear that if they did they could just hand me their uniform because they will no longer be needing it. When they did something out of line that I had no prior knowlede of I explained to them why that is done, then motivated them through the cardio-vascular system.

TDog
06-05-2008, 01:35 PM
In 1973, author Philip Roth (Portnoy's Complaint, Goodbye Columbus) came out with a hilarious book titled The Great American Novel, about the Port Ruppert Mundys, a mythical baseball team that played all of their games on the road in the mythical Patriot League at the beginning of World War II. In the book, a pitcher hits a home plate umpire with a fastball in the throat and is banished from the league.

This criminal act by this high school battery reminded me of how much fun I had reading that book.

johnr1note
06-05-2008, 01:51 PM
It's really a disciplinary situation, IMO. Nothing to prosecute really. It's simple assault and probably wouldn't even rise to battery given the ump's protective gear.

The pitcher and catcher should be held accountable and not allowed to pitch next season for example or suspended from all team sports for the year. I am sure if either one of them is a scholarship athlete, they will end up getting those scholarships revoked, at least I would hope so. Community college instead of a 4 year ride would be a great punishment for their stupidity.

By definition, assault is an action that "places another in reasonable apprehension of receiving a battery." A battery is an intentional unpermitted touching of another. While common law provides that any unpermitted touching is battery, even if slight, the modern day interpretation is the circumstances must be a touching that is rude, angry, or insolent. I think this incident qualifies as both assault and battery.

TDog
06-05-2008, 02:01 PM
By definition, assault is an action that "places another in reasonable apprehension of receiving a battery." A battery is an intentional unpermitted touching of another. While common law provides that any unpermitted touching is battery, even if slight, the modern day interpretation is the circumstances must be a touching that is rude, angry, or insolent. I think this incident qualifies as both assault and battery.

And laws, of course, vary from state to state. In Alaska, for example, there is no crime of battery. There are various degrees of assault. Georgia is a much older state with much older traditions, probably differentiating between assault and battery.

Regardless of whether the act was in fact criminal, it was criminal in spirit. But throwing at a vulnerable batter-to-be on the on-deck circle would be criminal in spirit as well, and such a pitcher was drafted by the Cubs.


They tell you when you're in high school that things will go on your permanent record. Sometimes that doesn't seem to matter.

Iwritecode
06-05-2008, 02:26 PM
By definition, assault is an action that "places another in reasonable apprehension of receiving a battery." A battery is an intentional unpermitted touching of another. While common law provides that any unpermitted touching is battery, even if slight, the modern day interpretation is the circumstances must be a touching that is rude, angry, or insolent. I think this incident qualifies as both assault and battery.

By that definition a pitcher hitting a batter is the same thing.

Iwritecode
06-05-2008, 02:27 PM
Though it's illegal, a batter is cognizant that at any time he might be hit.

An umpire should be aware that he may be hit at any time as well. Either by a foul tip or a passed ball/wild pitch.

PolishPower83
06-05-2008, 02:29 PM
Real classy, boys.

Domeshot17
06-05-2008, 02:56 PM
This kind of stuff isn't all that rare. You don't always hear about it because most catchers pull a better acting job off. I am not saying I agree with it, but people need to understand things that happen during the game will happen during the game.

When I was a sophomore in high school we were waiting for the game before us to end in the regional tournament. There was a play where the base runner ran over the catcher, which is illegal according to IHSA rules. The run scored, and the Umps decided it wasn't intentional (The was no slide, he took out the catcher to score). First pitch to the next batter the catcher set up down and away, and the pitch got the ump up and in. The message was sent. Its how the game is. Emotions run high come playoff time.

I also don't believe in throwing the books at 17 and 18 year olds. I think its stupid to say throw the law at the high school kid, but when the college and semi pro and minor league guys do it, its fine.

TDog
06-05-2008, 03:06 PM
An umpire should be aware that he may be hit at any time as well. Either by a foul tip or a passed ball/wild pitch.

... for which the pitcher or batter responsible lacks the requisite criminal intent.

voodoochile
06-05-2008, 03:11 PM
By definition, assault is an action that "places another in reasonable apprehension of receiving a battery." A battery is an intentional unpermitted touching of another. While common law provides that any unpermitted touching is battery, even if slight, the modern day interpretation is the circumstances must be a touching that is rude, angry, or insolent. I think this incident qualifies as both assault and battery.

Technically yes, but it wouldn't go to court that way, IMO. It would plead out as assault at the most and probably dropped to a misdemeanor. I doubt this could be considered an intent to do harm, so all the serious consequences would go away.

Stripping the kids of athletic options/scholarships sends a much stronger message.

fquaye149
06-05-2008, 06:11 PM
An umpire should be aware that he may be hit at any time as well. Either by a foul tip or a passed ball/wild pitch.

Um, I guess, but to be hit unabated by a fastball aimed for his face?

Get real

fquaye149
06-05-2008, 06:14 PM
This kind of stuff isn't all that rare. You don't always hear about it because most catchers pull a better acting job off. I am not saying I agree with it, but people need to understand things that happen during the game will happen during the game.

When I was a sophomore in high school we were waiting for the game before us to end in the regional tournament. There was a play where the base runner ran over the catcher, which is illegal according to IHSA rules. The run scored, and the Umps decided it wasn't intentional (The was no slide, he took out the catcher to score). First pitch to the next batter the catcher set up down and away, and the pitch got the ump up and in. The message was sent. Its how the game is. Emotions run high come playoff time.

I also don't believe in throwing the books at 17 and 18 year olds. I think its stupid to say throw the law at the high school kid, but when the college and semi pro and minor league guys do it, its fine.

I don't necessarily disagree with you on this, but I will point out, even in the lexicon of the game, throwing at an ump intentionally is still a step up from throwing at a batter in terms of "sketchy ethics"

Hokiesox
06-05-2008, 06:24 PM
So if you intentionally throw at a batter who is wearing no protective equipment you might get a warning or possibly thrown out of the game.

If you throw at an umpire who is wearing a chest protector and face mask you get "investigated"?

:scratch:

I'm happy to show you the scar on my hand that required surgery after a 10 year old kid threw a fastball that shattered the first bone in my left hand. He wasn't intentionally throwing at me, the catcher was, well, a 9 year old kid. That was an accident! Imagine what injuries could be caused by a capable pitcher throwing intentionally.

I saw a guy get a concussion when a foul ball smashed him in the face mask. All the equipment is supposed to do is prevent SERIOUS injury. It doesn't always work, too. This is dangerous stuff.

Taliesinrk
06-06-2008, 09:34 AM
This kind of stuff isn't all that rare. You don't always hear about it because most catchers pull a better acting job off. I am not saying I agree with it, but people need to understand things that happen during the game will happen during the game.

When I was a sophomore in high school we were waiting for the game before us to end in the regional tournament. There was a play where the base runner ran over the catcher, which is illegal according to IHSA rules. The run scored, and the Umps decided it wasn't intentional (The was no slide, he took out the catcher to score). First pitch to the next batter the catcher set up down and away, and the pitch got the ump up and in. The message was sent. Its how the game is. Emotions run high come playoff time.

I also don't believe in throwing the books at 17 and 18 year olds. I think its stupid to say throw the law at the high school kid, but when the college and semi pro and minor league guys do it, its fine.


+2

Iwritecode
06-06-2008, 09:38 AM
Um, I guess, but to be hit unabated by a fastball aimed for his facemask?

Get real


If the catcher would have been a better actor and at least made it look like he was attempting to catch the ball, this wouldn't even be a story.

fquaye149
06-06-2008, 09:45 AM
If the catcher would have been a better actor and at least made it look like he was attempting to catch the ball, this wouldn't even be a story.

I agree that it wouldn't have gotten much exposure if the catcher were a better actor, but let's not pretend getting hit in the facemask is no big deal, otherwise it would be no big deal for a pitcher to throw at a batter's head since he's wearing a helmet.

An umpire could very easily get a concussion or even possibly be killed if he were hit by a ball in the facemask in the wrong way.

Also there are unexposed parts near the facemask--the neck for instance.

I tell you what, go stand sixty feet away from a high school staff ace, wear a chest protector and a mask and pretty much nothing else, and let the kid aim for your face as hard as he can, and you can't flinch or move. If you come back and say that's "no big deal" I'll agree with you.

Iwritecode
06-06-2008, 12:00 PM
I agree that it wouldn't have gotten much exposure if the catcher were a better actor, but let's not pretend getting hit in the facemask is no big deal, otherwise it would be no big deal for a pitcher to throw at a batter's head since he's wearing a helmet.

An umpire could very easily get a concussion or even possibly be killed if he were hit by a ball in the facemask in the wrong way.

Also there are unexposed parts near the facemask--the neck for instance.

I tell you what, go stand sixty feet away from a high school staff ace, wear a chest protector and a mask and pretty much nothing else, and let the kid aim for your face as hard as he can, and you can't flinch or move. If you come back and say that's "no big deal" I'll agree with you.

So the next time a pitcher hits a batter in the head, whether it was intentional or not, I expect him to be charged the same as these kids were.

fquaye149
06-06-2008, 12:13 PM
So the next time a pitcher hits a batter in the head, whether it was intentional or not, I expect him to be charged the same as these kids were.

I think you're missing the point.

An ump has to stand there and take it and has no clue that a pitcher would be throwing at him intentionally.

A batter is in every way capable of ducking out of the way of a pitch and realizes at every point at the plate that a ball could very likely be headed at his head.

That's not to say a pitcher who beans a kid couldn't or shouldn't be punished, but it's to say that throwing at a player is like punching someone in the face and throwing at an ump is like punching someone in the back of the head

It's Dankerific
06-06-2008, 02:27 PM
I think you're missing the point.

An ump has to stand there and take it and has no clue that a pitcher would be throwing at him intentionally.

A batter is in every way capable of ducking out of the way of a pitch and realizes at every point at the plate that a ball could very likely be headed at his head.

That's not to say a pitcher who beans a kid couldn't or shouldn't be punished, but it's to say that throwing at a player is like punching someone in the face and throwing at an ump is like punching someone in the back of the head

What the heck are you talking about? Isn't the umpire watching the ball?

While it may be uncool, its not even close to getting punched in the back of the head.

Hell, I'm not even sure it was on purpose. Perhaps it was supposed to be in the dirt, the catcher goes for it, realizes hes not going to get his hands up in time, ducks his head. Just because its on Youtube don't make it true.

Ragator43
06-06-2008, 02:46 PM
What the heck are you talking about? Isn't the umpire watching the ball?

While it may be uncool, its not even close to getting punched in the back of the head.

Hell, I'm not even sure it was on purpose. Perhaps it was supposed to be in the dirt, the catcher goes for it, realizes hes not going to get his hands up in time, ducks his head. Just because its on Youtube don't make it true.

The umpire should be watching the ball, but ducking or trying to hide behind the catcher for protection aren't options.

fquaye149
06-06-2008, 03:06 PM
What the heck are you talking about? Isn't the umpire watching the ball?

While it may be uncool, its not even close to getting punched in the back of the head.

Hell, I'm not even sure it was on purpose. Perhaps it was supposed to be in the dirt, the catcher goes for it, realizes hes not going to get his hands up in time, ducks his head. Just because its on Youtube don't make it true.

The umpire is watching the ball, but he's supposed to resist getting out of the way.

He has approximately 1/1000th of a second between when he realizes the catcher isn't going to catch the ball and when it hits him.

On the other hand, the batter has about 1.5 seconds between when he realizes the ball might hit him and when it hits him.

So yes, it's like getting punched in the back of the head compared to getting punched in the face.

:rolleyes:

IlliniSox4Life
06-06-2008, 08:14 PM
The umpire is watching the ball, but he's supposed to resist getting out of the way.

He has approximately 1/1000th of a second between when he realizes the catcher isn't going to catch the ball and when it hits him.

On the other hand, the batter has about 1.5 seconds between when he realizes the ball might hit him and when it hits him.

So yes, it's like getting punched in the back of the head compared to getting punched in the face.

:rolleyes:

It's like getting punched in the back of the head if you're wearing a back-of-the-headmask

fquaye149
06-06-2008, 08:30 PM
It's like getting punched in the back of the head if you're wearing a back-of-the-headmask

Sure...just as long as a guy getting punched in the face to whom we're comparing the back-of-the-head punch has a front of the headmask too.

The point is one is a sucker punch (hitting an ump), the other the guy can see coming and protect himself (batter)

Gavin
06-06-2008, 08:39 PM
The umpire is watching the ball, but he's supposed to resist getting out of the way.

He has approximately 1/1000th of a second between when he realizes the catcher isn't going to catch the ball and when it hits him.

On the other hand, the batter has about 1.5 seconds between when he realizes the ball might hit him and when it hits him.

So yes, it's like getting punched in the back of the head compared to getting punched in the face.

:rolleyes:


Weren't you advocating for the beaning of people in another thread?

fquaye149
06-06-2008, 09:01 PM
Weren't you advocating for the beaning of people in another thread?

i'm not saying it's ridiculously bad what these kids did. Like a number of posters have said, it's pretty well commonplace when umps are being *******s.

If you were paying attention to this thread, you might have seen what I am actually trying to explain to a few clueless posters in this thread who think that hitting an ump is no different from plunking a batter:


Originally Posted by Domeshot17 http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1916788#post1916788)
This kind of stuff isn't all that rare. You don't always hear about it because most catchers pull a better acting job off. I am not saying I agree with it, but people need to understand things that happen during the game will happen during the game.

When I was a sophomore in high school we were waiting for the game before us to end in the regional tournament. There was a play where the base runner ran over the catcher, which is illegal according to IHSA rules. The run scored, and the Umps decided it wasn't intentional (The was no slide, he took out the catcher to score). First pitch to the next batter the catcher set up down and away, and the pitch got the ump up and in. The message was sent. Its how the game is. Emotions run high come playoff time.

I also don't believe in throwing the books at 17 and 18 year olds. I think its stupid to say throw the law at the high school kid, but when the college and semi pro and minor league guys do it, its fine.

FQUAYE'S RESPONSE: I don't necessarily disagree with you on this, but I will point out, even in the lexicon of the game, throwing at an ump intentionally is still a step up from throwing at a batter in terms of "sketchy ethics"

manders_01
06-07-2008, 11:25 PM
Just heard on the news that the ump is suing. Although there are a ton of frivolous lawsuits out there these days, I totally agree with this one.

TDog
06-08-2008, 01:17 AM
Just heard on the news that the ump is suing. Although there are a ton of frivolous lawsuits out there these days, I totally agree with this one.

I expected the umpire to sue. I would be interested in seeing who the defendnants are. He seems to have a case against several.