I'm going to say that I think in play #1 the umpire actually got it right. The argument is that this should be catcher's interference with a runner attempting to score on a squeeze play, which is a double penalty of a balk on the pitcher (scoring the run) and the batter getting first base. But in order for that to be the correct award, the catcher must step on or in front of home plate without the ball, which it doesn't appear that he did. The other option is that if the batter had swung and made contact with the catcher, then you'd have more run of the mill catcher's interference, but in that case the ruling isn't both awards, its either batter gets first OR the run scores. Not both.
I’m an umpire. I wanna give props to that Minnesota coach at the end. Sure, the call was wrong, but he set such a wonderful example of how to move on from that and keep playing. Don’t let it get in your head. And he also - more importantly - showed those kids how to extend grace despite a mistake. The sport needs more coaches like him ! Class act !!
I think all four of the umpires should have volunteered themselves back home after that horrible blown call. Especially after their decision to stand by it. Kudos on the coach for keeping a positive attitude and proper example in front of his team.
0:44 Catcher's "obstruction"? I'm having a tough time calling this one, assuming this is NFHS. The catcher didn't step "on or across" home plate, nor push the batter to reach for the ball or touch the bat, as defined in rule 8-3-1c. I got no obstruction on the catcher.
That's not a bad judgement, but I'd call that catcher obstruction because he prevented the batter from bunting. Looked like he planned to bunt, but couldn't due to the catcher stepping in his way.
@@MH-Tesla Here's the thing with that. Obstruction on the swing, interference on the follow through. I call games, my son is a catcher, and I always drill the catcher rules into him. I had to slow it down to see if there was a catchers balk (Yes, catchers balk and it's charged to the pitcher.) At the start of the delivery of the pitch. The catcher MUST be in the catcher's box. After the delivery is started as long as the catcher is in the catchers box. Said catcher can go where he/she pleases. Now where the baseball IQ comes into play is on the batter. All the batter had to do was bring his bat around and tap the catcher. Then you would get the obstruction (Catcher's interference). No attempt to hit the ball, no obstruction. Or as I tell my son. An obstruction has to happen in order to get the obstruction call. ie. When stealing 3rd, my son looks at the batter as he's making his move. If the batter puts one foot out of the box. He's "accidentally" running into him and spiking the ball. He had to learn the hard way the first time. He bumped into the batter, but never attempted the throw. The HPU explained that he didn't attempt the throw. Therefore, no interference.
@@tw1nn319 No, a catcher's balk is when the catcher is out of the catcher's box when the pitcher starts his/her delivery (Plus a couple more ways for a catcher's balk). Catcher's interference is when the catcher interferes with the batters swing. The batter never attempted to hit the ball. Therefore, no swing interfered with. There had to be an action and the batter did not provide that action. What your trying to say is "IF" the batter attempted to hit the ball, it would be interference. You can't call interference on a "If he did".
@@jonathanpalmos2911 the term "catcher's balk" doesn't exist in NFHS. Because it isn't a balk. The only person that can advance on a catcher's obstruction is the batter, any runner attempting to steal, and anybody forced to advance by said batter or said stealing runner. A balk would imply that all runners advance, which isn't the case. Also, for obstruction, it is well defined, and not being in the catcher's box is not in NFHS rules for obstruction. Catchers obstruction is in front of or across home plate, touches the batter to catch the ball, touches the batters bat. That's it.
If you see MJHs response to my comment below you will see that he was trying to highlight positive interactions when umpires make mistakes. I get it now and agree. We had an umpire Saturday morning that called a ball fair that landed two feet foul just past the third base bag. I think that he probably got confused thinking that the ball bounced and was calling it based on where it was going over the bag. No big deal. Let's play on. Our kids kind of laughed it off and our parents encouraged them to get the next out. My favorite thing to say to an umpire when I disagree with a call is, with a big smile on my face, 'let's call New York.' They always laugh at that.
maybe the ball bounced in fair territory b/4 getting to 3rd base, then bounded over the bag b/4 landing in foul territory after 3rd base. That would be a fair ball.
I've been a LL umpire for over 20 years now. That's a great response "let's call NY". It reminds me of an infield fly call I made and it was not an infield fly situation. I believe there were runners on 1st and 3rd on opening day. I like lots of umpires, hadn't called any pre-season games or practices. I hadn't called a game since the prior season. When both managers questioned me, I tapped my chest indicating it was my fault and said "I was just practicing my infiled fly call". We all laughed and moved on. Once you make the call, especially doing a game alone, you have to live with it.
SAFE? as a coach I'd ask why? as an umpire I would have a difficult time selling this. I "could" say obstruction. The catcher, without the ball, did not give the runner a clear path to the ball, one where there would be no contact. KUDOS to the coach indeed for how he handled that.
Was he not hit with the ball? He does a check swing and doesn't go all the way, but if he was hit then a run scores. The umpire just probably didn't call the hit by pitch.
re: the play at 1st at 2:48. the primary fault here lies with U1 making the out mechanic way too fast, which is a bad habit to get in to. we have been taught for years: read, react, call. there's nothing that says you have to make a safe/out call at first base immediately, especially if it is routine; which in this case it was not. but once your hand goes up in the air, 99.9% are going to stand with the call, even though it is wrong. a one- or two-second pause to make sure everything goes smoothly is very appropriate and would have saved a lot of grief in this instance.
Hundo-P! Even on close plays at 1B at the MLB level, the batter-runner has come through the bag and has circled back to the dugout…and then the umpire calls him out. Obviously, taking too much time is not ideal either but, good timing is important. It’s nothing until the call is made.
Play #2 - the batter runner didn't interfere, and in fact vacated the area as required by 7-3-5d. I hate to say it, but that's a terrible call by the PU here. and no, it's NOT a double-play, that shows a gross misunderstanding of the rules. if the batter interfered, then the ball was dead and the play at home never happened... you don't get both. IF we accept the BI call, then the proper result is that R3 is out for the batter's interference, and the batter resumes his at-bat with a strike for the missed bunt attempt added to his count. (the only way this would be a double-play is if the missed bunt attempt was strike 3, however that's obviously not the case here)
play #1 - this is Catcher's Obstruction in NFHS (and Catcher's Interference in all other codes). The run scores, the batter is awarded 1st base. The other runners are forced to advance by the batter being awarded 1st base. all other answers are wrong.
Except the catcher never stepped in front of the plate and the batter didn't swing and take his head off. So by rule its not catcher's interference/obstruction. If the catcher had stepped in front of the plate or if the batter had swung and made contact with the catcher, then yes.
Okie dokie, 6.01(g) is the rule reference you're looking for under OBR. Requires the catcher to step on or in front of the plate without the ball. The catcher did not do that; therefor you cannot give the offence both the run and the interference because it does not meet the definition of 6.01(g). If you rule this as catcher's interference by the mere fact that the catcher popped up to receive the ball and got really close to the batter; then you can award catcher's interference under 6.01(c), but that only allows either the play or the first base award, not both. Under NFHS rules, this is would be determined differently. 8-1e(1) states that any runner attempting to advance (at any base) gets the base they were going to AND the batter gets first. But again, you're going to have to explain why this is catcher's interference/obstruction since he didn't actually step in front of the plate or touch the bat.
@michael mack no, this is not a 6.01(g) violation. Just plain, ordinary 6.01(c) catcher interference. You can't possibly believe the batter has to whack the catcher in the back of the head to get a CI call can you?
@@davej3781 if it's plain old catchers interference then the ruling is correct, for obr at least. As far as whether it's interference or not, explain why it should be considered interference. We agree the catcher did not step on or in front of the plate without the ball. The catcher did not touch the bat. He didn't touch the batter. He jumped up to get the ball, yes, but what specifically makes that illegal?
First video …. It’s not catchers interference (not the right terminology) upon the catcher observing the runner attempting to steal home!! I stand amazed of how every parent is an expert on all rules.
The first one is not Catcher’s Interference. In fact, it is a Catcher’s Balk. I was taught this rule by a Hall of Fame Umpire who does Division 3 Baseball almost every weekend in the summer in Michigan.
Under OBR rules (which NCAA uses for the most part for College at all levels), this would be a balk, often called the "Catcher's Balk" AND catcher interference. It's one situation where TWO infractions are called on the same play. The Interference must be called here because the catcher stepped in front of the batter and prevented the batter from having a chance to strike at the pitch and the balk advances all runners. (You're College umpire friend will confirm this as well.) In high school NFHS rules, they specifically call this "Catcher's Obstruction" and award 1st to the batter and any runner advancing on that play gets the base they were advancing towards. Again, the "Catcher's Obstruction" must be called here even if the batter steps back.
@@garygemmell3488 when the batter is in the box his body is facing the plate. The catcher stepped on the plate, therefore in front of the batter. You're thinking "front" being between batter and pitcher. No, think of the plate being "in front" of the batter.
@@gr8dane626 "The catcher stepped on the plate, therefore in front of the batter". Please indicate the time stamp where this occurred. And I know damn well what being in front of the batter is. You may now start squirming for another reason why the catcher was in front of the batter.
For the little league play at 4:47, my guess is that the umpires got flustered and did not explain their call to the coach. I think the plate umpire thought the pitch hit the batter, but when all the runners took off running, the plate umpire reacted. I assume in the huddle they were all trying to confer whether either of them saw the pitch did not hit the batter and none of them could confirm so they went with the plate umpire and called the runner safe by default. At that point, the play was irrelevant.
1:42 is batter interference for sure since he stepped out of the box. At 10U my son, tried to get out of the way on throw down to 3rd base and interfered with the catcher. Umpire just sent the runner back with no other penalty. In 13U he was up to bat and the runner was attempting to steam home and the catcher dropped the ball behind my son, who stood there like a statue. Ump was impressed with his discipline to not move. The other coach didn't know the rule and after the ump explained it to him he nodded his head and walked away.
It's interesting how the human response to unusual or pressured circumstance can lead the brain to completely lock up (except maybe the dropped ball out call at first where there was simply no excuse other than inexperienced mechanics). In my experience, most of these mistakes come down to lack of positioning or, as in most of these cases, tracking. Tracking slows everything down and allows the body to engage after thinking the situation through to make the right call.
Or: Surprised Officials F(oul) Up. The one thing I could NOT put up with was officials that covered up being surprised by lying to the coach/manager they had just victimized. For example, saying that the first baseman was on the bag when she jumped a foot towards home to make the play.
@@roberthudson1959 I agree. I umpired for 30 years. I was not always correct on my calls, but all calls were made in good faith. Being correct 99% of the time means I made a lot mistakes in the span of 30 years There were indeed times when I got surprised... but I did my best to suck it up and make things right. Nobody is ever correct 100% of the time. Admitting that is the adult thing to do!
1st play---I don't have CI, because he let the ball cross the plate and the batter didn't swing. I see the argument for it, but both feet were in the box at T.o.P. and ball was received behind the plate. 2nd play--I have him out at home and the batter still batting because the batter cleared this time (didn't in 1st play but still didn't interfere). 3rd play---If it was lopsided, I'm not arguing, but as an ump the integrity of the game should have him safe. LLWS play---just normal LLWS umpiring. They are the worst and need to get good, paid umpires.
re: the force play at home called "safe". i will never believe that volunteer umpires are better than paid umpires. remember the old saying: "you get what you pay for". having started as a little league umpire, i can verify that advancement toward the llws regionals and finals has everything to do with seniority and networking and almost nothing to do with merit and skills. there is no incentive in little league umpiring to become better. just bide your time, don't rock the boat, shine your shoes, and you will most likely advance. four umpires getting this call wrong is a prime example.
On the interference call at home. If there are less than 2 outs only the runner is called out and the at bat continues. If there are 2 outs then the batter should be called out and no run scores.
ok the first one is a wash, he didnt call catchers int(obs) safe anyway. couldnt hear the comments from crowd well. The second play, its the runner thats out, not the batter, definitely not both lol, still couldnt hear the comments from crowd
LLWS umpires are volunteers. Credit to those men and women for giving their time and expenses to travel and provide to the tournament and kids. It wouldn’t be possible without them. However, to put them on blast for bad calls is like a volunteer coach of a kids league who has a very generic understanding of the sport and trying to put in an offense/defense play style for an identity. Let alone compare it to a college or high level HS Varsity lol.
We should be putting Little League on blast for not paying umpires. The LLWS makes a lot of money, and obviously the kids and coaches don't get paid. The LLWS makes millions every year and no one on that field sees any of it. Instead of relying on volunteers and then using that as excuse for bad officiating, Little League should be paying for high quality umpiring.
I have to disagree. Not paying volunteers says exactly what the money says: they are worth nothing. As an umpire and former board baseball & basketball director, if there is a problem with a referee or umpire, it seems 9 out of 10 times they are a volunteer. Not paying people also doesn't hold them accountable. I.E., you really can't *fire* a volunteer.
On LLWS call...I can understand the HP umpire just blanking that the bases were loaded. I think the problem was while ALL the umpires can tell him it was a force and it looked like the catcher was on home plate my guess is none of them SAW the catchers foot, and why should they its not there responsibility. In which case they would ask the HP umpire and he would say all I noticed was no tag...hence if you didn't see it you can't call it wins the day. But that is just terrible beyond believe. Props to the coach but I'm sure if the score was different he might have been a little more persistent. This is where is I always ask very specific question to make sure the umpire is making a judgement call and not misapplying a rule. As long as the only explanation the umpire gives is "I did not see his foot on the plate" then you simply have no choice but to go sit down.
The shortage of umpires isn't because they are getting worse. It is because of how they are being treated. Horrible parents and coaches that think they are in the major league.
I don't get the point of this video. What are you trying to prove? That Umpires make mistakes. My guess is after watchin your videos for years now that you have turned into part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Geez.
My apologies for thinking that showing good behavior would be a net positive. Got to be honest, was shocked to see people upset because a video was posted demonstrating how things SHOULD be at a baseball game and how coaches and even spectators should act. I can't really promise that I will not show positive behavior in the future.
@@MJHBaseball My apologies. I completely misunderstood the point. Now that I watch the video with that in mind I get what you were trying to accomplish. I completely agree with you that highlighting positive behavior is very important. We see way too much bad behavior towards umpires that quite frankly teaches children to disrespect grown adults. It infuriates me. We make a big deal about treatin umpires with respect on our 11u team and have no tolerance for anything less than that.
If it is catchers interference, then it’s a delay dead ball, and then the coach will have the option of the result of the play or put the batter on base. Therefore, the plate umpire got it right
As a youth umpire, I have to agree with the others comments here questioning what the point of this video is. I love this channel and have watched it for years. But cherry picking three examples of fans and coaches acting appropriately in the face of bad calls is hardly a rejoinder to the well-documented epidemic of youth officials being subjected to abuse and the resulting decline in volunteers. The vast majority of plays are properly called. The vast majority of bad calls are handled appropriately. So it shouldn’t be particularly remarkable that you can find examples of such. But I don’t know any youth umpire who hasn’t been chirped at, yelled at, called obscenities, or threatened with physical violence (if not actually been subjected to violence) from coaches, parents, grandparents, random spectators, and players. It’s a serious problem, and suggesting otherwise is misguided.
play #3 - U1's timing was WAY too fast, and he has poor mechanics in setting up for the play. even what look like routine, automatic outs need to be taken seriously because things like this happen at every level. I don't see exactly how the ball comes out, but I see no indication of firm and secure possession as required by rule. that all said, if the score of the game was heavily lopsided and I just need outs, I might go with an out call anyway, say it was dropped on the transfer.
On the LLWS play if I was the coach I would have asked there was a force at the plate and when they said yes I would then did the catcher have his foot on the plate with possession before the runner got there and if they said none of the umpires saw his foot on the plate then I would be upset but walk away. If they said yes then I would wonder if it could be protested because at that point it is not about judgement but a rule. I know they are volunteers for the LLWS but with 3 base umpires even with them all having certain things to be watching one of them should have been glancing at the play at the plate and could have talked the plate ump to reverse the call.
@@richardsnook7697 I agree. Obstruction on the catcher with runner safe, however, ump never signaled that, and he didn't show any confidence. Too bad, that was an easy way out of this.
Totally don’t see catcher’s interference on the first play. With the Pitcher in the full wind up, this looks absolutely like a straight on steal of home. The batter stepped back and out of the path of the runner when the runner was about 1/2 of the way home. At the time that he stepped back, the catcher was not approaching the plate nor interfering with him in any way. I think Blue got it right.
Because there was no one among them who could confirm that the catchers foot was on the plate at the time of the play. Video shows us that it was there, if there were video review of calls at this level, it would be overturned. However, because none of the officials could confirm it between themselves, they will not contradict the official that "had the call". Sometimes that sucks.
First play appears to be catcher interference as it is a pitch. Less than 2 out, then runner is out, with 2 outs, batter is out and run does not score. If it was less than 2 outs, not clear how two outs called, unless a strikeout, though then another call should be made (no catch) and batter afforded ability to run to first.
I got no call. The batter never attempted to swing or bunt at the pitch and never touched the catcher with the bat. Since there was no attempt to hit the ball, there was no catchers interference. All the batter had to do was touch the catcher with the bat and he would have gotten the call.
@@jonathanpalmos2911 that is completely the wrong interpretation of catcher's interference. the judgment to make is "if the batter had wanted to, could he have hit the pitch without interference?" obviously there was no way he could hit the pitch with the catcher where he was - that makes it catcher's interference, no question. think seriously about the consequences of your interpretation: if the catcher gets into the batter's way, the batter has to beat the catcher with the heavy stick in his hand in order to get a CI call?
I'm going to need some help on that first one. It looks to me like the pitcher (strangely) pitched from the wind-up, correctly went through his motion, and legally delivered. Is it because the catcher was up and out of the box prior to the delivery?
Rule 6.01(g). If a runner on third base (R3) is trying to score by means of a squeeze play or steal, and the catcher or any other fielder steps in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the batter or the bat, the catcher is cited for the defensive interference, and the pitcher is charged with a balk ("catcher's balk"). The batter is awarded first base on the interference ("catcher's interference") and the ball is dead. "Defensive interference is an act by a fielder which hinders or prevents a batter from hitting a pitch." The following is from: www.umpirebible.com/index.php/rules-interference/defensive-catcher-s-interference Note that this ruling applies only in this special case of a runner attempting to steal home. You see this now and then. The pitcher starts his delivery, but the catcher becomes aware that R3 is attempting to steal home, so the catcher tries to rush and in doing so steps in front of the batter to more quickly get the ball. That's interference. NFHS rules are slightly different, but the result is the same.
@@MJHBaseball are you guys playing OBR or NFHS in this game? You cited OBR here. Regardless, though, neither of these rulebook have this as catchers obstruction/interference (OBR) .
NFHS (but I don't have the rule # accessible at the moment and they are basically the same.) I agree that the first clip is a judgement call and not every umpire will give the catcher obstruction call in real time here. That being said, did the catcher "hinder or prevent the batter from hitting the pitch?" The rule does not claim he must stand his ground and actually strike the catcher with the bat....god forbid. All it states is that "an act by a fielder which hinders or prevents a batter from hitting a pitch" is obstruction (according to NFHS) or a balk (according to OBR). Why would you NOT call this interference (or balk if OBR)? I'm open to being wrong especially if you have a casebook citing that clarifies.
@@MJHBaseball Because it's NOT catcher's interference. Did the batter attempt to hit the pitch? No. Therefore, the catcher did not hinder him from attempting to hit the pitch. If this is anything at all, it's a balk.
I understand your thought process and simply disagree. It helps that I know what the play was and that the batter was supposed to bunt here. You see him set his feet for that purpose. He doesn't because the catcher jumped in front of him. That being said, it's still a judgement call. Had the catcher stood overtop home plate, then it's no longer a judgment call as the rule specifically states doing so on a pitched ball is an automatic call. (In OBR - balk; in NFHS - catcher's obstruction.) [See above comment in this thread.] All this aside, this first clip was included primarily to set up the second clip because they were back to back pitches in the same game. You will notice the batter DID NOT fail to attempt the bunt the 2nd time. But the pitcher also was not in the wind-up, so the catcher didn't have as much time to react to R3 stealing. I'm surprised so many comments on the first clip and almost nothing about the 2nd. Appreciate your comments and engagement on this.
You have to look at each of these one time and then render a call, do not look at them a zillion times. Then you will have a flavor of what the umpire must deal with when administrating, observing, and finally rendering a call on a play. play #1 nothing wrong here, for it to be a catcher's balk (charged to the pitcher) the catcher must be standing on home plate before having the ball. play #2 the batter blocked the view of the runner....however, the out was registered so no batter interference. play #3 the umpire needs to have waited to make the safe/out call just in case the ball is dropped before the fielder has demonstrated control of the ball. #4 This was a hit by pitch and an immediate dead ball. The strike/ball would depend if the umpire believed the batter to have swung or was attempting to get out of the way...this is not a live ball.
Your approach to this video is all wrong. These examples should be how coaches and parents should react, but it doesn’t mean we don’t have serious issues. I was heckled by a parent at a charity tournament this past weekend, for example, on a play I got right. The end result of this video is counterproductive.
@@MJHBaseball You could have done that without belittling the concerns that we as officials have about coach and parent conduct and it would have been well received. I personally had parents get to the point in a basketball game this winter (8U) that I cried in my car. Our concerns are real.
If that is how I came across, then that is my fault. Since you are not the only one, obviously my intro was stated in a poor manner. I understand the issues we deal with as umpires or officials. (Especially, it seems, at the younger levels like 8U.)
For those disparaging the video, that's not my take on this...at all. I wish I knew his name, but his videos are one of my few "must watch" videos. Everything that comes out of this channel...must watch. I assumed the point of this video was highlighting how fans/coaches SHOULD be acting at games during crappy calls, like the LL coach who was awesome. He's stated multiple times that he gets behind the dish and umpires. I have total respect for him.
In little league the runner leaving early is not called out but returned to the base. If the ball is in play, he can only advance as far as the hit would have allowed him to advance. It's a really long rule in the Little League rule book with 16 different "what if's" listed. Rule 7.13. You can see it here: www.littleleague.org/playing-rules/little-league-rulebook-app/
@@MJHBaseball sadly, LL has now adopted the softball rule, runners that leave early will be called out. BUT, they're not yet enforcing the rule, it's not clear when it will be officially added. I'm hoping there's enough pushback that they drop it before it's ever implemented.
The rule change for Baseball to call the runner out for leaving early was not passed in November 2022, so the rule remains the same. I did double check on this, because in August they voted to change this rule, but at the vote in November, the change did not pass, so that one remains the same.
Let's cherry pick a couple of plays and say umpires are crazy about fan and coach conduct. Seriously, I think just but posting videos like this now, you are doing noting but enabling people to just go the wrong route. I used to enjoy your content talking about rules and you make the call type videos, but come on, there is a problem, there is a culture out there that is pushing people from officiating sports. For every clip where the behavior was good here, there are prob ten time more other instances that were not handled the same way by fans coaches and players.
@@MH-Tesla No, it's good to see good behavior in these videos...unfortunately, MJH has fallen into the trap of anecdotal evidence "Since people rarely misbehave at **my** games, they must rarely act out at all other games!"
One to ten is a ratio that matches what I've seen in my experience. I've been involved with softball and baseball for the last 25 years, from 8U up to NCAA. Each year, I work about 100 games and watch another 100. One might think I have seen or heard it all, but game participants continue to amaze me with their creativity. I've been asked which one of the players I was f--king during a 16U softball game. I've been followed to my car in a dark parking lot by Dads or Grandmas. I've seen coolers full of ice and beer thrown over the fence. I've been accused of gender bias by a college coach after ejecting her when she called me a quote "spineless f--king pussy" unquote. I've been punched by 18 year olds on the field while working. I've seen grown men say vile things to young female umpires, including stating that they had no business ever setting foot on a baseball field for any reason. I've been in the middle of a potential fistfight situation between two high school coaches (grown men), and had to eject the scorekeeper who thought it would be a good idea to run onto the field and sucker punch the visiting team's assistant coach while "no one was looking". Last year, I had to have stadium staff remove a section of the fans at a major softball venue who had decided it was a good idea to sexually harass the center fielder so loudly that I could hear what they were saying from my position in the infield. The popular thing to do now seems to be trucking an unsuspecting fielder in the back when they turn to watch the ball and obstruct the runner rounding a base. I see LOTS more of that in recent years at the high school levels and above than ever before. Two softball players and a baseball player got themselves sent to the showers early in my games last year for that sort of crap. Does misconduct like this happen in every game? No, of course not. Looking back through the last decade's worth of game logs, I end up seeing an ejectable offense in about 2% of games, or 1 of 50. Now, that may be because I'm a veteran. If we were to just count warnings for problems brewing inside the fences, that's probably about 10% or one in ten.As a rough guess, I'd estimate that inappropriate comments from fans occurs in roughly 25% of games. I don't listen to fans while I work, but I hear what they're saying while I'm evaluating games. It's funny sometimes how they will act when they think no one is watching. That's nearly 40% of games where someone involved as either a player, coach, or spectator is misbehaving or acting in an unsporting manner. Now, here's the paradox I've observed: the games in which we have to put the worst umpires we have out there on the field are often the smoothest games. The expectations of the fans and coaches are so low that they don't bother even arguing when Bobby goes out there and makes calls from 80 feet away and invents rules from his backside. Game participants only seem to get emotionally involved when they expect good officiating.
@@MH-Tesla it's not that showing people behaving correctly is a bad thing, it's implying that the way these coaches and spectators react is representative of the youth baseball community as a whole. Across the nation there is an increase of unsportsmanlike conduct, so much so that NFHS made it a point of emphasis in all of their rulebooks, and there's umpire shortages across the nation because of it. Articles have been written, studies and surveys done and they nearly all show that unsportsmanlike conduct, especially from parents/spectators, are driving would be officials away. But here's MJH going "look at these three or four examples, two from the same crowd, they're reacting appropriately, clearly there isn't a problem." That's the bad thing.
This video wasn't about umpires. This video was about COACHES not going ballistic over a call. Some times it is a good thing to highlight the proper way to coach youth baseball. At least I think it is. If you don't like videos showing great coaching habits, then you do not need to watch.
The rules on this play, I am assuming your referring to the stealing of home, if the runner is safe, we still have catcher interference of the batter which would score the run AND award first to the batter. That is the missed call on that one. On the second clip, you can't get two outs (runner and batter) when a runner stealing home is put out on the play. Umpire called batter out for interference and runner out on the tag.
Immediately say "they are volunteers, pay their own way". Meaning "please forgive them for their blunders and mistakes". If you don't know what a Force out is, that's what you get for FREE.
In LL it is illegal for a catcher to block the plate before possessing the baseball, the catcher was clearly blocking the plate without the ball which is why the runner was called safe, which was the right call🤷🏻♂️
The LLWS play video I posted in the past but needed to remove it as it's only using footage I did not shoot and do not own. I did like that clip (and what it taught), and therefore re-posted it as a part of a compilation of plays and reactions attempting to make the same point. Only dedicated subscribers like you will notice the "reuse" so I greatly appreciate your being here and commenting. I assure you, the "reuse" of clips will NOT become like some other baseball channels we both are aware of. I'm not even reusing clips for Shorts. The majority of my shorts are never before seen clips. Not saying they will ALWAYS be new, just mostly new.
I am so freaking tired of the "they're all volunteers, they pay their own way, they pay for their own meals, blah, blah, blah, blah." I umpired 3k games until my knees finally gave out and in that time I NEVER worked a LL tournament, nor would I. I worked many a PONY league tournament and got paid for every game. I also worked many out of town ASA regional, zone, and national championship tournaments. Our travel was reimbursed, hotels were paid for, and the quality of umpiring was head and shoulders above LL. Volunteers at the local level are fine. If LL is going to put these games on TV, they owe the players, parents, and supporters the best umpiring available. Getting one of these assignments because of your volunteer service is just foolish. Chances are, very few, if any of these volunteers belong to an association, and if they do, that association is NOT providing free umpires. Umpires who belong to an association that charges for umpires are competing against other umpires for these post season assignments. If you can't cut the mustard, you get to sit in the stands. When I was officiating I was competing against 100 other umpires for post season assignments. The leagues and organizations that were paying for those umpires deserved the best for their money, not for some schmoe that was a volunteer for 10 years and for whom someone decided to say "Thanks".
Steal of home: Umpires appear to have gotten nothing wrong. This was not a pitch. F1 appears to disengage and step off the back of rubber with his pivot foot at 1:28, ending the pitch. F1 can do this, because at any time during the pitcher’s preliminary movements, he may throw to any base provided he steps directly toward the base before making the throw (5.07(d)). F2 is positioned legally to receive the throw to make a play (5.02(a)). Nobody got screwed. This is a clean steal and clean defense. Suicide squeeze: Ooof, this one just keeps getting worse the longer I watch it. If we ignore the judgment aspect temporarily, this *is* the correct rule for this situation. The batter may not interfere the defense with a play at home; with two outs, the batter is out, and with fewer than two outs, the runner is out (5.09(b)(8))... but I have absolutely no idea how it could be judged that the batter interfered with the defense here, ESPECIALLY if he judged that F2 made the tag on R3 on the bang-bang play at the plate. You **can't** get two outs here UNLESS the bunt attempt was on two strikes, in which case it's a putout and a strikeout, but the batter becomes a batter-runner on the uncaught pitch as 1B was not occupied with less than two outs at the time of the pitch. Dropped ball on force at 1B: Ugh. Get out there and ask him what he saw and if he saw the ball on the ground. Home force play. Ugh. Obvious miss. How the hell does the crew NOT get this fixed? This umpire is smothering the crap out of this call. On a force play, he should be a minimum of 12-15 feet from the base. Even if this was a tag, he's way too close. Now, I have to admit, these are some rather well-behaved fans and coaches with positive attitudes. In my experience at a variety of levels in both baseball and softball, these would have generated far more uproar.
First pitcher was in the windup. Once he starts, he's got to pitch, so that's a pitch. If he stopped mid pitch to step off it would be a balk. Consequently, a balk would be better because the batter stays at the plate and the run scores which is what the umpire ruled anyway. LoL.
@@MH-Tesla You might want to read 5.07(a)(1) and 5.07(d) (assuming OBR rules; could be different if this is under NFHS rules, but judging by the red umpire shirts, it's not). The pitcher never made any natural movement associated with the delivery of the ball. All movement appeared to be preliminary to the pitch.
@@teebob21 He's standing in the windup. He lifts his hands...he is now committed to pitch (every rule set). That's why the runner starts stealing home at that point. Also, he didn't step off, he did deliver the pitch correctly. Preliminary movement is prior to coming set in the windup or set position. Since he is clearly in the windup and hands together, any movement other than disengaging, commits him to pitch.
There are 76 full-time MLB umpires in the world. Pat Hoberg was the top balls and strikes guy last season with a 97% accuracy. That means the best guy on this planet is still incorrect on 3 out of 100 pitches he sees. In your video, these are not professional players and these are not professional umpires. How about we stop continuing to tear down youth sports officials and umpires and start acknowledging that without them…it’s just a scrimmage. Yes, ALL umpires miss calls at ALL levels of baseball. Now move along…nothing else to see here.
For clip one in this video, see the following rule explanation for NFHS: ruclips.net/video/OwACCuUWGDs/видео.html
he didn't reach over the plate....I watch all of Patrick's vids as a GHSA umpire
I'm going to say that I think in play #1 the umpire actually got it right. The argument is that this should be catcher's interference with a runner attempting to score on a squeeze play, which is a double penalty of a balk on the pitcher (scoring the run) and the batter getting first base. But in order for that to be the correct award, the catcher must step on or in front of home plate without the ball, which it doesn't appear that he did. The other option is that if the batter had swung and made contact with the catcher, then you'd have more run of the mill catcher's interference, but in that case the ruling isn't both awards, its either batter gets first OR the run scores. Not both.
Correct. And with catchers interference, the coach on the non offending team can elect to take the result of the play if they so choose. Correct ?
I agree. I watched the video linked by the OP and rewatched this clip and don't see catcher interference.
You took the words out of my mouth. Excellent description!
I’m an umpire. I wanna give props to that Minnesota coach at the end. Sure, the call was wrong, but he set such a wonderful example of how to move on from that and keep playing. Don’t let it get in your head. And he also - more importantly - showed those kids how to extend grace despite a mistake. The sport needs more coaches like him ! Class act !!
Exactly right. Now let’s get back to the umpires. That wasn’t a judgement call. How did all four umpires miss that. Horrible. Forget the life lessons.
I think all four of the umpires should have volunteered themselves back home after that horrible blown call. Especially after their decision to stand by it. Kudos on the coach for keeping a positive attitude and proper example in front of his team.
It helps that his team was still up by 9 runs even after the bad call.
They always bring up that the umpires there are volunteers. Maybe they should dish out a little bit of cash to get better umpires in little league.
@@Joey_PSU for the Little League World Series, the teams invite umpires to come and officiate. The umpires, just like the teams pay their own way.
I wonder how many games MJH baseball has umpired.
0:44 Catcher's "obstruction"? I'm having a tough time calling this one, assuming this is NFHS. The catcher didn't step "on or across" home plate, nor push the batter to reach for the ball or touch the bat, as defined in rule 8-3-1c. I got no obstruction on the catcher.
That's not a bad judgement, but I'd call that catcher obstruction because he prevented the batter from bunting. Looked like he planned to bunt, but couldn't due to the catcher stepping in his way.
@@MH-Tesla Here's the thing with that. Obstruction on the swing, interference on the follow through. I call games, my son is a catcher, and I always drill the catcher rules into him. I had to slow it down to see if there was a catchers balk (Yes, catchers balk and it's charged to the pitcher.) At the start of the delivery of the pitch. The catcher MUST be in the catcher's box. After the delivery is started as long as the catcher is in the catchers box. Said catcher can go where he/she pleases. Now where the baseball IQ comes into play is on the batter. All the batter had to do was bring his bat around and tap the catcher. Then you would get the obstruction (Catcher's interference). No attempt to hit the ball, no obstruction. Or as I tell my son. An obstruction has to happen in order to get the obstruction call. ie. When stealing 3rd, my son looks at the batter as he's making his move. If the batter puts one foot out of the box. He's "accidentally" running into him and spiking the ball. He had to learn the hard way the first time. He bumped into the batter, but never attempted the throw. The HPU explained that he didn't attempt the throw. Therefore, no interference.
@@jonathanpalmos2911 its a "catchers balk" a catcher preventing a swing from the batter by entering the zone
@@tw1nn319 No, a catcher's balk is when the catcher is out of the catcher's box when the pitcher starts his/her delivery (Plus a couple more ways for a catcher's balk). Catcher's interference is when the catcher interferes with the batters swing. The batter never attempted to hit the ball. Therefore, no swing interfered with. There had to be an action and the batter did not provide that action. What your trying to say is "IF" the batter attempted to hit the ball, it would be interference. You can't call interference on a "If he did".
@@jonathanpalmos2911 the term "catcher's balk" doesn't exist in NFHS. Because it isn't a balk. The only person that can advance on a catcher's obstruction is the batter, any runner attempting to steal, and anybody forced to advance by said batter or said stealing runner. A balk would imply that all runners advance, which isn't the case.
Also, for obstruction, it is well defined, and not being in the catcher's box is not in NFHS rules for obstruction. Catchers obstruction is in front of or across home plate, touches the batter to catch the ball, touches the batters bat. That's it.
What an outstanding job by the South Dakota choice of using the missed call as a teaching opportunity
If you see MJHs response to my comment below you will see that he was trying to highlight positive interactions when umpires make mistakes. I get it now and agree.
We had an umpire Saturday morning that called a ball fair that landed two feet foul just past the third base bag. I think that he probably got confused thinking that the ball bounced and was calling it based on where it was going over the bag. No big deal. Let's play on. Our kids kind of laughed it off and our parents encouraged them to get the next out.
My favorite thing to say to an umpire when I disagree with a call is, with a big smile on my face, 'let's call New York.' They always laugh at that.
maybe the ball bounced in fair territory b/4 getting to 3rd base, then bounded over the bag b/4 landing in foul territory after 3rd base. That would be a fair ball.
@@brianc8031 No man. He missed the call.
I've been a LL umpire for over 20 years now. That's a great response "let's call NY". It reminds me of an infield fly call I made and it was not an infield fly situation. I believe there were runners on 1st and 3rd on opening day. I like lots of umpires, hadn't called any pre-season games or practices. I hadn't called a game since the prior season. When both managers questioned me, I tapped my chest indicating it was my fault and said "I was just practicing my infiled fly call". We all laughed and moved on. Once you make the call, especially doing a game alone, you have to live with it.
how do 4 umpires get that llws call wrong? wow.
SAFE? as a coach I'd ask why? as an umpire I would have a difficult time selling this. I "could" say obstruction. The catcher, without the ball, did not give the runner a clear path to the ball, one where there would be no contact. KUDOS to the coach indeed for how he handled that.
@@leonmatthewsiv1699 probably asked if it was a force out and then just didn’t see the catcher on the plate somehow.
Was he not hit with the ball? He does a check swing and doesn't go all the way, but if he was hit then a run scores.
The umpire just probably didn't call the hit by pitch.
@@Aaronwithaj No it hit the knob of the bat.
re: the play at 1st at 2:48. the primary fault here lies with U1 making the out mechanic way too fast, which is a bad habit to get in to. we have been taught for years: read, react, call. there's nothing that says you have to make a safe/out call at first base immediately, especially if it is routine; which in this case it was not. but once your hand goes up in the air, 99.9% are going to stand with the call, even though it is wrong. a one- or two-second pause to make sure everything goes smoothly is very appropriate and would have saved a lot of grief in this instance.
Hundo-P! Even on close plays at 1B at the MLB level, the batter-runner has come through the bag and has circled back to the dugout…and then the umpire calls him out. Obviously, taking too much time is not ideal either but, good timing is important. It’s nothing until the call is made.
Play #2 - the batter runner didn't interfere, and in fact vacated the area as required by 7-3-5d. I hate to say it, but that's a terrible call by the PU here.
and no, it's NOT a double-play, that shows a gross misunderstanding of the rules. if the batter interfered, then the ball was dead and the play at home never happened... you don't get both.
IF we accept the BI call, then the proper result is that R3 is out for the batter's interference, and the batter resumes his at-bat with a strike for the missed bunt attempt added to his count.
(the only way this would be a double-play is if the missed bunt attempt was strike 3, however that's obviously not the case here)
play #1 - this is Catcher's Obstruction in NFHS (and Catcher's Interference in all other codes). The run scores, the batter is awarded 1st base. The other runners are forced to advance by the batter being awarded 1st base.
all other answers are wrong.
Except the catcher never stepped in front of the plate and the batter didn't swing and take his head off. So by rule its not catcher's interference/obstruction. If the catcher had stepped in front of the plate or if the batter had swung and made contact with the catcher, then yes.
@@michaelmack9376 it's catcher interference whether the batter swings or not.
Okie dokie, 6.01(g) is the rule reference you're looking for under OBR. Requires the catcher to step on or in front of the plate without the ball. The catcher did not do that; therefor you cannot give the offence both the run and the interference because it does not meet the definition of 6.01(g). If you rule this as catcher's interference by the mere fact that the catcher popped up to receive the ball and got really close to the batter; then you can award catcher's interference under 6.01(c), but that only allows either the play or the first base award, not both. Under NFHS rules, this is would be determined differently. 8-1e(1) states that any runner attempting to advance (at any base) gets the base they were going to AND the batter gets first. But again, you're going to have to explain why this is catcher's interference/obstruction since he didn't actually step in front of the plate or touch the bat.
@michael mack no, this is not a 6.01(g) violation. Just plain, ordinary 6.01(c) catcher interference. You can't possibly believe the batter has to whack the catcher in the back of the head to get a CI call can you?
@@davej3781 if it's plain old catchers interference then the ruling is correct, for obr at least. As far as whether it's interference or not, explain why it should be considered interference. We agree the catcher did not step on or in front of the plate without the ball. The catcher did not touch the bat. He didn't touch the batter. He jumped up to get the ball, yes, but what specifically makes that illegal?
The first video was that the elite A’s? And what tournament was that? I think it was a saginaw,mi based event in Grand Rapids…..
Just 4 calls does not make it right. There is problem with fans and the way they treat people who step up to call a kids game.
First video …. It’s not catchers interference (not the right terminology) upon the catcher observing the runner attempting to steal home!! I stand amazed of how every parent is an expert on all rules.
The first one is not Catcher’s Interference. In fact, it is a Catcher’s Balk. I was taught this rule by a Hall of Fame Umpire who does Division 3 Baseball almost every weekend in the summer in Michigan.
Take that back. I just remembered that the catcher has to be in the others batter’sbox.
Under OBR rules (which NCAA uses for the most part for College at all levels), this would be a balk, often called the "Catcher's Balk" AND catcher interference. It's one situation where TWO infractions are called on the same play. The Interference must be called here because the catcher stepped in front of the batter and prevented the batter from having a chance to strike at the pitch and the balk advances all runners. (You're College umpire friend will confirm this as well.)
In high school NFHS rules, they specifically call this "Catcher's Obstruction" and award 1st to the batter and any runner advancing on that play gets the base they were advancing towards. Again, the "Catcher's Obstruction" must be called here even if the batter steps back.
@@MJHBaseball When did the catcher step in front of the batter?
@@garygemmell3488 when the batter is in the box his body is facing the plate. The catcher stepped on the plate, therefore in front of the batter. You're thinking "front" being between batter and pitcher. No, think of the plate being "in front" of the batter.
@@gr8dane626 "The catcher stepped on the plate, therefore in front of the batter". Please indicate the time stamp where this occurred. And I know damn well what being in front of the batter is. You may now start squirming for another reason why the catcher was in front of the batter.
For the little league play at 4:47, my guess is that the umpires got flustered and did not explain their call to the coach. I think the plate umpire thought the pitch hit the batter, but when all the runners took off running, the plate umpire reacted. I assume in the huddle they were all trying to confer whether either of them saw the pitch did not hit the batter and none of them could confirm so they went with the plate umpire and called the runner safe by default. At that point, the play was irrelevant.
1:42 is batter interference for sure since he stepped out of the box. At 10U my son, tried to get out of the way on throw down to 3rd base and interfered with the catcher. Umpire just sent the runner back with no other penalty. In 13U he was up to bat and the runner was attempting to steam home and the catcher dropped the ball behind my son, who stood there like a statue. Ump was impressed with his discipline to not move. The other coach didn't know the rule and after the ump explained it to him he nodded his head and walked away.
1:42 batter interference on the suicide squeeze is wrong. That's a huge bummer there. Your batter had 1 job...hit it no matter what :)
It's interesting how the human response to unusual or pressured circumstance can lead the brain to completely lock up (except maybe the dropped ball out call at first where there was simply no excuse other than inexperienced mechanics). In my experience, most of these mistakes come down to lack of positioning or, as in most of these cases, tracking. Tracking slows everything down and allows the body to engage after thinking the situation through to make the right call.
Or: Surprised Officials F(oul) Up. The one thing I could NOT put up with was officials that covered up being surprised by lying to the coach/manager they had just victimized. For example, saying that the first baseman was on the bag when she jumped a foot towards home to make the play.
@@roberthudson1959 I agree.
I umpired for 30 years. I was not always correct on my calls, but all calls were made in good faith. Being correct 99% of the time means I made a lot mistakes in the span of 30 years There were indeed times when I got surprised... but I did my best to suck it up and make things right. Nobody is ever correct 100% of the time. Admitting that is the adult thing to do!
1st play---I don't have CI, because he let the ball cross the plate and the batter didn't swing. I see the argument for it, but both feet were in the box at T.o.P. and ball was received behind the plate.
2nd play--I have him out at home and the batter still batting because the batter cleared this time (didn't in 1st play but still didn't interfere).
3rd play---If it was lopsided, I'm not arguing, but as an ump the integrity of the game should have him safe.
LLWS play---just normal LLWS umpiring. They are the worst and need to get good, paid umpires.
re: the force play at home called "safe". i will never believe that volunteer umpires are better than paid umpires. remember the old saying: "you get what you pay for". having started as a little league umpire, i can verify that advancement toward the llws regionals and finals has everything to do with seniority and networking and almost nothing to do with merit and skills. there is no incentive in little league umpiring to become better. just bide your time, don't rock the boat, shine your shoes, and you will most likely advance. four umpires getting this call wrong is a prime example.
The 1sr play was catchers int...but since runner was stealing he gets home, batter-runner should have gotten 1st
On the interference call at home. If there are less than 2 outs only the runner is called out and the at bat continues. If there are 2 outs then the batter should be called out and no run scores.
ok the first one is a wash, he didnt call catchers int(obs) safe anyway. couldnt hear the comments from crowd well. The second play, its the runner thats out, not the batter, definitely not both lol, still couldnt hear the comments from crowd
Those volunteer umps make some very bad calls. That force out miss was blatant.
And on the second play at Homeplate, it was battered interference so the runner needs to go back to third and the batter is out. It’s not a play.
LLWS umpires are volunteers. Credit to those men and women for giving their time and expenses to travel and provide to the tournament and kids. It wouldn’t be possible without them. However, to put them on blast for bad calls is like a volunteer coach of a kids league who has a very generic understanding of the sport and trying to put in an offense/defense play style for an identity. Let alone compare it to a college or high level HS Varsity lol.
We should be putting Little League on blast for not paying umpires. The LLWS makes a lot of money, and obviously the kids and coaches don't get paid. The LLWS makes millions every year and no one on that field sees any of it. Instead of relying on volunteers and then using that as excuse for bad officiating, Little League should be paying for high quality umpiring.
I have to disagree. Not paying volunteers says exactly what the money says: they are worth nothing. As an umpire and former board baseball & basketball director, if there is a problem with a referee or umpire, it seems 9 out of 10 times they are a volunteer. Not paying people also doesn't hold them accountable. I.E., you really can't *fire* a volunteer.
@@Il_Exile_lImy thoughts exactly !!
On LLWS call...I can understand the HP umpire just blanking that the bases were loaded. I think the problem was while ALL the umpires can tell him it was a force and it looked like the catcher was on home plate my guess is none of them SAW the catchers foot, and why should they its not there responsibility. In which case they would ask the HP umpire and he would say all I noticed was no tag...hence if you didn't see it you can't call it wins the day. But that is just terrible beyond believe. Props to the coach but I'm sure if the score was different he might have been a little more persistent. This is where is I always ask very specific question to make sure the umpire is making a judgement call and not misapplying a rule. As long as the only explanation the umpire gives is "I did not see his foot on the plate" then you simply have no choice but to go sit down.
Best I can figure is they are trying to let the SD team avoid the mercy rule
Good call or bad. Live with it. IT IS ONLY A GAME.
The shortage of umpires isn't because they are getting worse. It is because of how they are being treated. Horrible parents and coaches that think they are in the major league.
I quit watching all sports because of the many terrible calls !
Those ups paid their own way and volunteered and are brutal. Don’t think they are there for the baseball? Obvious what they are there for
I don't get the point of this video. What are you trying to prove? That Umpires make mistakes.
My guess is after watchin your videos for years now that you have turned into part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Geez.
My apologies for thinking that showing good behavior would be a net positive. Got to be honest, was shocked to see people upset because a video was posted demonstrating how things SHOULD be at a baseball game and how coaches and even spectators should act. I can't really promise that I will not show positive behavior in the future.
@@MJHBaseball My apologies. I completely misunderstood the point. Now that I watch the video with that in mind I get what you were trying to accomplish. I completely agree with you that highlighting positive behavior is very important. We see way too much bad behavior towards umpires that quite frankly teaches children to disrespect grown adults. It infuriates me. We make a big deal about treatin umpires with respect on our 11u team and have no tolerance for anything less than that.
I had a ump today where I had 1 ball 1 strike and I swung and missed at a pitch and he called strike 3 on strike 2
Ask the ump to go to the home book. What’s the count?
@@kevinkiss3340 1 ball two strikes
If it is catchers interference, then it’s a delay dead ball, and then the coach will have the option of the result of the play or put the batter on base. Therefore, the plate umpire got it right
Last one was the most egregious.
As a youth umpire, I have to agree with the others comments here questioning what the point of this video is. I love this channel and have watched it for years. But cherry picking three examples of fans and coaches acting appropriately in the face of bad calls is hardly a rejoinder to the well-documented epidemic of youth officials being subjected to abuse and the resulting decline in volunteers. The vast majority of plays are properly called. The vast majority of bad calls are handled appropriately. So it shouldn’t be particularly remarkable that you can find examples of such. But I don’t know any youth umpire who hasn’t been chirped at, yelled at, called obscenities, or threatened with physical violence (if not actually been subjected to violence) from coaches, parents, grandparents, random spectators, and players. It’s a serious problem, and suggesting otherwise is misguided.
play #3 - U1's timing was WAY too fast, and he has poor mechanics in setting up for the play. even what look like routine, automatic outs need to be taken seriously because things like this happen at every level. I don't see exactly how the ball comes out, but I see no indication of firm and secure possession as required by rule.
that all said, if the score of the game was heavily lopsided and I just need outs, I might go with an out call anyway, say it was dropped on the transfer.
On the LLWS play if I was the coach I would have asked there was a force at the plate and when they said yes I would then did the catcher have his foot on the plate with possession before the runner got there and if they said none of the umpires saw his foot on the plate then I would be upset but walk away. If they said yes then I would wonder if it could be protested because at that point it is not about judgement but a rule.
I know they are volunteers for the LLWS but with 3 base umpires even with them all having certain things to be watching one of them should have been glancing at the play at the plate and could have talked the plate ump to reverse the call.
Did anybody notice the position of the catcher? He was in the baseline causing interference.
@@richardsnook7697 I agree. Obstruction on the catcher with runner safe, however, ump never signaled that, and he didn't show any confidence. Too bad, that was an easy way out of this.
Totally don’t see catcher’s interference on the first play.
With the Pitcher in the full wind up, this looks absolutely like a straight on steal of home. The batter stepped back and out of the path of the runner when the runner was about 1/2 of the way home.
At the time that he stepped back, the catcher was not approaching the plate nor interfering with him in any way. I think Blue got it right.
For the 2015 LLWS game, how could 4 adult umpires get together and call that safe?
Because there was no one among them who could confirm that the catchers foot was on the plate at the time of the play. Video shows us that it was there, if there were video review of calls at this level, it would be overturned. However, because none of the officials could confirm it between themselves, they will not contradict the official that "had the call". Sometimes that sucks.
Bad umpire form/positioning. This guy is set up on wrong side of plat and still has his mask on for tag play at plate? wtf?
First play appears to be catcher interference as it is a pitch. Less than 2 out, then runner is out, with 2 outs, batter is out and run does not score. If it was less than 2 outs, not clear how two outs called, unless a strikeout, though then another call should be made (no catch) and batter afforded ability to run to first.
I got no call. The batter never attempted to swing or bunt at the pitch and never touched the catcher with the bat. Since there was no attempt to hit the ball, there was no catchers interference. All the batter had to do was touch the catcher with the bat and he would have gotten the call.
@@jonathanpalmos2911 that is completely the wrong interpretation of catcher's interference. the judgment to make is "if the batter had wanted to, could he have hit the pitch without interference?" obviously there was no way he could hit the pitch with the catcher where he was - that makes it catcher's interference, no question. think seriously about the consequences of your interpretation: if the catcher gets into the batter's way, the batter has to beat the catcher with the heavy stick in his hand in order to get a CI call?
Did you see the size and muscles on that catcher. He looks like he could be in college. I doubt hes 12
The last 1 should have been a dead ball hit batter, the ball never hit the bat
Wow bad call
I'm going to need some help on that first one. It looks to me like the pitcher (strangely) pitched from the wind-up, correctly went through his motion, and legally delivered. Is it because the catcher was up and out of the box prior to the delivery?
Rule 6.01(g). If a runner on third base (R3) is trying to score by means of a squeeze play or steal, and the catcher or any other fielder steps in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the batter or the bat, the catcher is cited for the defensive interference, and the pitcher is charged with a balk ("catcher's balk"). The batter is awarded first base on the interference ("catcher's interference") and the ball is dead.
"Defensive interference is an act by a fielder which hinders or prevents a batter from hitting a pitch."
The following is from: www.umpirebible.com/index.php/rules-interference/defensive-catcher-s-interference
Note that this ruling applies only in this special case of a runner attempting to steal home. You see this now and then. The pitcher starts his delivery, but the catcher becomes aware that R3 is attempting to steal home, so the catcher tries to rush and in doing so steps in front of the batter to more quickly get the ball. That's interference.
NFHS rules are slightly different, but the result is the same.
@@MJHBaseball are you guys playing OBR or NFHS in this game? You cited OBR here. Regardless, though, neither of these rulebook have this as catchers obstruction/interference (OBR) .
NFHS (but I don't have the rule # accessible at the moment and they are basically the same.) I agree that the first clip is a judgement call and not every umpire will give the catcher obstruction call in real time here. That being said, did the catcher "hinder or prevent the batter from hitting the pitch?" The rule does not claim he must stand his ground and actually strike the catcher with the bat....god forbid. All it states is that "an act by a fielder which hinders or prevents a batter from hitting a pitch" is obstruction (according to NFHS) or a balk (according to OBR).
Why would you NOT call this interference (or balk if OBR)? I'm open to being wrong especially if you have a casebook citing that clarifies.
@@MJHBaseball Because it's NOT catcher's interference.
Did the batter attempt to hit the pitch? No. Therefore, the catcher did not hinder him from attempting to hit the pitch.
If this is anything at all, it's a balk.
I understand your thought process and simply disagree. It helps that I know what the play was and that the batter was supposed to bunt here. You see him set his feet for that purpose. He doesn't because the catcher jumped in front of him. That being said, it's still a judgement call. Had the catcher stood overtop home plate, then it's no longer a judgment call as the rule specifically states doing so on a pitched ball is an automatic call. (In OBR - balk; in NFHS - catcher's obstruction.) [See above comment in this thread.]
All this aside, this first clip was included primarily to set up the second clip because they were back to back pitches in the same game. You will notice the batter DID NOT fail to attempt the bunt the 2nd time. But the pitcher also was not in the wind-up, so the catcher didn't have as much time to react to R3 stealing. I'm surprised so many comments on the first clip and almost nothing about the 2nd.
Appreciate your comments and engagement on this.
How about you become an umpire. You think you know all the rules and you obviously do not. Sometimes humans do make mistakes.
The 1st two plays are tough, you make it seem like the umps made obvious errors - not too obvious
You have to look at each of these one time and then render a call, do not look at them a zillion times. Then you will have a flavor of what the umpire must deal with when administrating, observing, and finally rendering a call on a play. play #1 nothing wrong here, for it to be a catcher's balk (charged to the pitcher) the catcher must be standing on home plate before having the ball. play #2 the batter blocked the view of the runner....however, the out was registered so no batter interference. play #3 the umpire needs to have waited to make the safe/out call just in case the ball is dropped before the fielder has demonstrated control of the ball. #4 This was a hit by pitch and an immediate dead ball. The strike/ball would depend if the umpire believed the batter to have swung or was attempting to get out of the way...this is not a live ball.
#4 was not HBP. The ball hit the knob of the bat. That's why the batter ran. He knew.
10-1 and they complaining ?
Your approach to this video is all wrong. These examples should be how coaches and parents should react, but it doesn’t mean we don’t have serious issues. I was heckled by a parent at a charity tournament this past weekend, for example, on a play I got right. The end result of this video is counterproductive.
Thought it would be nice to show positive examples for a change.
@@MJHBaseball You could have done that without belittling the concerns that we as officials have about coach and parent conduct and it would have been well received. I personally had parents get to the point in a basketball game this winter (8U) that I cried in my car. Our concerns are real.
If that is how I came across, then that is my fault. Since you are not the only one, obviously my intro was stated in a poor manner. I understand the issues we deal with as umpires or officials. (Especially, it seems, at the younger levels like 8U.)
For those disparaging the video, that's not my take on this...at all. I wish I knew his name, but his videos are one of my few "must watch" videos. Everything that comes out of this channel...must watch.
I assumed the point of this video was highlighting how fans/coaches SHOULD be acting at games during crappy calls, like the LL coach who was awesome.
He's stated multiple times that he gets behind the dish and umpires. I have total respect for him.
I have watched every single one of his videos, but the premise of this video is wrong.
Third one, runner on second should’ve been the one to be out, he left before the ball crosses home plate
This is big boy ball.
@@teebob21 no the little league game
In little league the runner leaving early is not called out but returned to the base. If the ball is in play, he can only advance as far as the hit would have allowed him to advance. It's a really long rule in the Little League rule book with 16 different "what if's" listed. Rule 7.13. You can see it here: www.littleleague.org/playing-rules/little-league-rulebook-app/
@@MJHBaseball sadly, LL has now adopted the softball rule, runners that leave early will be called out. BUT, they're not yet enforcing the rule, it's not clear when it will be officially added. I'm hoping there's enough pushback that they drop it before it's ever implemented.
The rule change for Baseball to call the runner out for leaving early was not passed in November 2022, so the rule remains the same. I did double check on this, because in August they voted to change this rule, but at the vote in November, the change did not pass, so that one remains the same.
Let's cherry pick a couple of plays and say umpires are crazy about fan and coach conduct. Seriously, I think just but posting videos like this now, you are doing noting but enabling people to just go the wrong route. I used to enjoy your content talking about rules and you make the call type videos, but come on, there is a problem, there is a culture out there that is pushing people from officiating sports. For every clip where the behavior was good here, there are prob ten time more other instances that were not handled the same way by fans coaches and players.
So showing people act appropriately is a bad thing? Really?
@@MH-Tesla No, it's good to see good behavior in these videos...unfortunately, MJH has fallen into the trap of anecdotal evidence "Since people rarely misbehave at **my** games, they must rarely act out at all other games!"
One to ten is a ratio that matches what I've seen in my experience. I've been involved with softball and baseball for the last 25 years, from 8U up to NCAA. Each year, I work about 100 games and watch another 100. One might think I have seen or heard it all, but game participants continue to amaze me with their creativity.
I've been asked which one of the players I was f--king during a 16U softball game. I've been followed to my car in a dark parking lot by Dads or Grandmas. I've seen coolers full of ice and beer thrown over the fence.
I've been accused of gender bias by a college coach after ejecting her when she called me a quote "spineless f--king pussy" unquote. I've been punched by 18 year olds on the field while working. I've seen grown men say vile things to young female umpires, including stating that they had no business ever setting foot on a baseball field for any reason. I've been in the middle of a potential fistfight situation between two high school coaches (grown men), and had to eject the scorekeeper who thought it would be a good idea to run onto the field and sucker punch the visiting team's assistant coach while "no one was looking".
Last year, I had to have stadium staff remove a section of the fans at a major softball venue who had decided it was a good idea to sexually harass the center fielder so loudly that I could hear what they were saying from my position in the infield.
The popular thing to do now seems to be trucking an unsuspecting fielder in the back when they turn to watch the ball and obstruct the runner rounding a base. I see LOTS more of that in recent years at the high school levels and above than ever before. Two softball players and a baseball player got themselves sent to the showers early in my games last year for that sort of crap.
Does misconduct like this happen in every game? No, of course not. Looking back through the last decade's worth of game logs, I end up seeing an ejectable offense in about 2% of games, or 1 of 50. Now, that may be because I'm a veteran. If we were to just count warnings for problems brewing inside the fences, that's probably about 10% or one in ten.As a rough guess, I'd estimate that inappropriate comments from fans occurs in roughly 25% of games. I don't listen to fans while I work, but I hear what they're saying while I'm evaluating games. It's funny sometimes how they will act when they think no one is watching.
That's nearly 40% of games where someone involved as either a player, coach, or spectator is misbehaving or acting in an unsporting manner.
Now, here's the paradox I've observed: the games in which we have to put the worst umpires we have out there on the field are often the smoothest games. The expectations of the fans and coaches are so low that they don't bother even arguing when Bobby goes out there and makes calls from 80 feet away and invents rules from his backside.
Game participants only seem to get emotionally involved when they expect good officiating.
@@MH-Tesla it's not that showing people behaving correctly is a bad thing, it's implying that the way these coaches and spectators react is representative of the youth baseball community as a whole. Across the nation there is an increase of unsportsmanlike conduct, so much so that NFHS made it a point of emphasis in all of their rulebooks, and there's umpire shortages across the nation because of it. Articles have been written, studies and surveys done and they nearly all show that unsportsmanlike conduct, especially from parents/spectators, are driving would be officials away.
But here's MJH going "look at these three or four examples, two from the same crowd, they're reacting appropriately, clearly there isn't a problem." That's the bad thing.
@@teebob21 Exactly my reaction to this video. "True for me, ergo true for all"
Just because a call didn't go your way or is "blatantly wrong" doesn't mean that it is acceptable to blow up and abuse umpires.
Very true
You sir are a back seat driver. Just admit you do not like umpires.
This video wasn't about umpires. This video was about COACHES not going ballistic over a call. Some times it is a good thing to highlight the proper way to coach youth baseball. At least I think it is. If you don't like videos showing great coaching habits, then you do not need to watch.
@@MJHBaseball I won't, you are a hypocrite
Did he score yes so u have nothing shhh
The rules on this play, I am assuming your referring to the stealing of home, if the runner is safe, we still have catcher interference of the batter which would score the run AND award first to the batter. That is the missed call on that one. On the second clip, you can't get two outs (runner and batter) when a runner stealing home is put out on the play. Umpire called batter out for interference and runner out on the tag.
Immediately say "they are volunteers, pay their own way". Meaning "please forgive them for their blunders and mistakes". If you don't know what a Force out is, that's what you get for FREE.
In LL it is illegal for a catcher to block the plate before possessing the baseball, the catcher was clearly blocking the plate without the ball which is why the runner was called safe, which was the right call🤷🏻♂️
The Catcher should not be blocking the plate.If the throw goes up the 3rd base line he has the right to get the ball.
@@rinkdog1 pretty sure that you know and I know the plate ump didnt call safe because of catcher blocking the plate....
bad video here, re-used content, love the channel, but nothing to see here, other then good coaches and fans, which is ABNORMAL
The LLWS play video I posted in the past but needed to remove it as it's only using footage I did not shoot and do not own. I did like that clip (and what it taught), and therefore re-posted it as a part of a compilation of plays and reactions attempting to make the same point. Only dedicated subscribers like you will notice the "reuse" so I greatly appreciate your being here and commenting. I assure you, the "reuse" of clips will NOT become like some other baseball channels we both are aware of. I'm not even reusing clips for Shorts. The majority of my shorts are never before seen clips. Not saying they will ALWAYS be new, just mostly new.
I am so freaking tired of the "they're all volunteers, they pay their own way, they pay for their own meals, blah, blah, blah, blah." I umpired 3k games until my knees finally gave out and in that time I NEVER worked a LL tournament, nor would I. I worked many a PONY league tournament and got paid for every game. I also worked many out of town ASA regional, zone, and national championship tournaments. Our travel was reimbursed, hotels were paid for, and the quality of umpiring was head and shoulders above LL. Volunteers at the local level are fine. If LL is going to put these games on TV, they owe the players, parents, and supporters the best umpiring available. Getting one of these assignments because of your volunteer service is just foolish. Chances are, very few, if any of these volunteers belong to an association, and if they do, that association is NOT providing free umpires. Umpires who belong to an association that charges for umpires are competing against other umpires for these post season assignments. If you can't cut the mustard, you get to sit in the stands. When I was officiating I was competing against 100 other umpires for post season assignments. The leagues and organizations that were paying for those umpires deserved the best for their money, not for some schmoe that was a volunteer for 10 years and for whom someone decided to say "Thanks".
You just made that all up
@@sec1720 Whatever you say, Mr. Volunteer Umpire. Go strap your shin guards on the outside of your pants and turn your hat backwards.
@@garygemmell3488 a volunteer ump with my hat backwards while wearing shin guards in jorts. And still better than your imaginary umpiring days
@@sec1720 Keep on dreaming, sweetheart. You're a joke.
Oh, and it's spelled s-h-o-r-t-s, not j-o-r-t-s.
Steal of home: Umpires appear to have gotten nothing wrong. This was not a pitch. F1 appears to disengage and step off the back of rubber with his pivot foot at 1:28, ending the pitch. F1 can do this, because at any time during the pitcher’s preliminary movements, he may throw to any base provided he steps directly toward the base before making the throw (5.07(d)). F2 is positioned legally to receive the throw to make a play (5.02(a)). Nobody got screwed. This is a clean steal and clean defense.
Suicide squeeze: Ooof, this one just keeps getting worse the longer I watch it. If we ignore the judgment aspect temporarily, this *is* the correct rule for this situation. The batter may not interfere the defense with a play at home; with two outs, the batter is out, and with fewer than two outs, the runner is out (5.09(b)(8))... but I have absolutely no idea how it could be judged that the batter interfered with the defense here, ESPECIALLY if he judged that F2 made the tag on R3 on the bang-bang play at the plate. You **can't** get two outs here UNLESS the bunt attempt was on two strikes, in which case it's a putout and a strikeout, but the batter becomes a batter-runner on the uncaught pitch as 1B was not occupied with less than two outs at the time of the pitch.
Dropped ball on force at 1B: Ugh. Get out there and ask him what he saw and if he saw the ball on the ground.
Home force play. Ugh. Obvious miss. How the hell does the crew NOT get this fixed? This umpire is smothering the crap out of this call. On a force play, he should be a minimum of 12-15 feet from the base. Even if this was a tag, he's way too close.
Now, I have to admit, these are some rather well-behaved fans and coaches with positive attitudes. In my experience at a variety of levels in both baseball and softball, these would have generated far more uproar.
First pitcher was in the windup. Once he starts, he's got to pitch, so that's a pitch. If he stopped mid pitch to step off it would be a balk. Consequently, a balk would be better because the batter stays at the plate and the run scores which is what the umpire ruled anyway. LoL.
@@MH-Tesla You might want to read 5.07(a)(1) and 5.07(d) (assuming OBR rules; could be different if this is under NFHS rules, but judging by the red umpire shirts, it's not). The pitcher never made any natural movement associated with the delivery of the ball. All movement appeared to be preliminary to the pitch.
@@teebob21 He's standing in the windup. He lifts his hands...he is now committed to pitch (every rule set). That's why the runner starts stealing home at that point. Also, he didn't step off, he did deliver the pitch correctly. Preliminary movement is prior to coming set in the windup or set position. Since he is clearly in the windup and hands together, any movement other than disengaging, commits him to pitch.
@@MH-Tesla Your local area must use a different definition of "preliminary motion" from the windup than they teach at Wendlestadt's camp.
@@teebob21 Okay. Show this clip to anyone you trust as an umpire trainer. See what they tell you.
There are 76 full-time MLB umpires in the world. Pat Hoberg was the top balls and strikes guy last season with a 97% accuracy. That means the best guy on this planet is still incorrect on 3 out of 100 pitches he sees. In your video, these are not professional players and these are not professional umpires. How about we stop continuing to tear down youth sports officials and umpires and start acknowledging that without them…it’s just a scrimmage. Yes, ALL umpires miss calls at ALL levels of baseball. Now move along…nothing else to see here.
How could all four umpires screw up a force out at home?