Catcher hurt......do you kill the play?

[JRutledge]

I just wanted to know what you guys think about this play. I think I did the right thing but I want other opinions.

I am working the plate. The home team is in the field and the visiting team is at bat. R1 is on first base. The pitcher throws a ball in the dirt and hits the catcher square in the throat. The ball completely stops right in front of the catcher and R1 does not move at all. The catcher after a second or two gets up and starts walking to the bench area. The catcher is obviously hurt, but I could not tell how much. Then the runner starts to run to second base after a couple of seconds, but at the same time I kill the play. Now the visiting coach did not say anything at first. He waited until the current batter hit a ball into the outfield and moved R1 to third on a double. I happened to cover 3rd base and then the coach decided to say something to me. He was very cordial and respectful. The coach just wanted to know why I killed the play. The conversation went on without incident and he did not buy my explanation, but seemed to deal with it.

Now I asked my partner what he thought and he did not agree with me killing the play, but praised me for my explanation to the coach.

Now I want to get opinions if you feel I did the right thing by killing the play because I felt the kid might have been really hurt? Or do you feel I should have just let R1 run all over the diamond until someone picked it up?

Peace

[Edited by JRutledge on May 17th, 2005 at 04:21 AM]

[tmp44]

JRut,

I think you did the right thing here. The key to your post is that you waited a couple seconds before killing it. Think of it in terms of being on the basketball court. Kid gets injured, and if there is no chance of anyone really making a play to the hoop, you kill it. I think the same concept applies here and, IMO, you applied it correctly.

[officialtony]

I have to agree. Although I know I am going to take heat for my opinion, I would kill the play as soon as it is clear the catcher is really hurt ( going to the bench area ). Yes, R1 might advance and get all the way to 3rd or maybe even score, but I feel the spirit of the game, sportsmanship etc. was important enough to worry about the safety of the players. I could have just stood there and let the play unravel, but I am pretty sure that the catcher's teammates would have been running to his aid and not worried about playing on R1.
You were right . . . .
in my humble opinion.

[Macaroo]

I think you did the right thing in this situation. It sounds like you had a "dropped (not caught) third strike" since BR was heading to 1B. Did you allow BR 1B? Or, were there less than 2 outs and BR was out? Anyway, questioning why you killed the play after the next pitch (base hit) was a moot point. If he was so sharp, he would have yelled at BR to run to 1B right away, if allowed.

[akalsey]

There was a thread here a few weeks ago about killing the play on an injury. It seems the consensus was that you don't kill the play if there's continuous action. The extra 10 seconds it takes to complete the play isn't going to be life-threatening.

In your case, as soon as you saw that the runners were stationary and the BR was staying put, continous action is over and you kill the play. If the runners don't start to move until the catcher starts walking to the dugout, then it sounds like there was no continous action.

Would you have granted time if the catcher asked for it? From your description, play was stopped and I'd grant time in this case. So pretend the catcher asked for it.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Macaroo
I think you did the right thing in this situation. It sounds like you had a "dropped (not caught) third strike" since BR was heading to 1B. Did you allow BR 1B? Or, were there less than 2 outs and BR was out? Anyway, questioning why you killed the play after the next pitch (base hit) was a moot point. If he was so sharp, he would have yelled at BR to run to 1B right away, if allowed.

This was not a dropped third strike. This was just a pitch. No one struck out or walked. There was just a runner on first base.

Peace

[akalsey]

Then why was someone running to first base?

Then the runner starts to run to first base after a couple of seconds, but at the same time I kill the play.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by akalsey
Then why was someone running to first base?

That was a mistake on my part. I only described R1. The BR did not go anywhere.

Peace

[jicecone]

This is REAL simple in my mind, especially in sports where kids under 18 are involved. I do both Ice Hockey and Baseball, and if a player's injury, (IN MY OPINION), is serious enough to kill the play, I WILL DO IT EVERY TIME.

Im not jumping the gun here but, I would say error on the side of caution. The players health is BY FAR more important then the game. ANY COACH that is going to give me a hard time about that, is not staying around long to see the rest of the game.

By the same token, I officiated a contest last year in a semi-pro league and the pitcher was knocked out cold by the catcher's throw to second. We didn't immediately kill the play until the catcher retrieved the ball, and the runner advanced to 3rd, from 1st. Different League, differnt way to handle the situation.

I suggest you ALWAYS error on the side of caution when dealing with players under 18.

[Tim C]

I would not have killed the play.

[ChapJim]

I can't criticize Jeff. I see the catcher go down in a heap and I tend to try to stop play.

Jeff's post doesn't say how old the players are. I'm pretty much with jicecone. For college, men's leagues (except the geezers), and maybe HS varsity-age, I'd probably let the play run unless we are talking about lots of blood, compound/complex fractures, head injuries, etc.

Anything else, I'd probably kill it more quickly. The less on the line, the quicker.

[bluezebra]

An injury to the throat may be life-threatening, even if the player gets up and moves. There is no way of knowing what damage, if any, has occured. The safety of the player comes first. Kill the ball, R1 to 2B.

Bob

[mcrowder]

I seem to be in the minority here. But I don't kill the play. Someone asked if JR would have called time if asked at that moment - and in that position, with relaxed action I probably would have... but no one DID call time, and it's not my job to do so. Baseball is a live-action sport.

I will only kill the play if an injury is so severe that the extra few seconds might make a difference, or if action has become relaxed and the ball is in control somewhere. Give me the same situation as the initial post, but pitcher has the ball in hand, and I might be inclined to call time.

[Tim C]

I have catchers that get hit (seriously) rather often. I never stop the play. When play is done I always stop the action and give F2 time to recoop!

I would not have even considered stopping the play on this example. Guess that make me join the minority also.

[Jerry]

Tim,
I think the "minority" here, might actually be the "majority". The play needs to finish. There are times when players simply have the wind knocked out of them, experience a tramatic hit to the arm, leg, head; but without lasting consequence . . . even players apparently choking on their own spit. Obviously if you've got a severed limb lying on the ground, you'd have a different situation.

What do you do when a player accidently loses his helmet while running the bases? The odds of severe head injury increase dramatically, but you still allow action.

What if a player, not involved in the play, clutches his chest while there's still action going on? You don't call "time" in those situations either . . . or do you?

Jerry