Beware the backswing

Eleven years ago in a LL all star game my son took a hard shot in the head when a hitter lost his balance. It was so hard it knocked him over. He got up wobbly. He didn't seem himself into the next inning. LL keeps parents from getting near the dugout during all stars. No one checked my son. No one would listen to me asking my son be checked for a concussion. They suggested removing me from the park for making a scene. There used to be people/morons who thought concussions only come from being knocked unconscious.

My son was lethargic the entire game. I came close to calling the police. After the game my son told me he felt awful. He said he threw up twice in the dugout. I took him to the hospital. They kept him overnight for observation for a concussion. 

Like most poster's kids here my son is physically and mentally tough. He was the only competent catcher on the LL all star team. His catching meant more to his coach than his health.

Batty67 posted:

My son, a 2017 catcher, had a first last Friday. He got hit not once but TWICE by the same batter on different ABs. He's probably caught 100+ games in the big diamond by now, maybe far more. Anyhow, HS game, RH batter (maybe was a golfer?) has a long loopy swing and on the final extension nails my son on the back left side of his hockey-style helmet. Right there I'm telling myself THAT is why you where a fully protective helmet. If he was not, I'm pretty sure, best case, he's out of the game.

Next AB, he got hit on the back of the left arm, just above the elbow (thank G-d not on the bone). He yelps in pain. The umpire tells the batter to "knock it off. NOW" The batter, perplexed asks what he's doing wrong.  The umpire responds with something like "fix your swing before you really hurt someone. I don't want to see that again." I got most of this second-hand.

Thankfully, my son seems fine after the weekend.

My 14u catcher son took a swing to the back of his hockey helmeted head in the Fall, this was due to a horrible swing that ended with only one hand on the bat.  The bat struck my son squarely in the back of the head and it was like a gong!  The umpire immediately called the batter out and both sides of coaches went rushing for my son who was slumped down like he had passed out.  Thankfully he was just checking with himself internally before he opened up his eyes, got up, and said he was fine.  There was a LOT of fingers waving in his face checking his pupils...etc.

Fast forward to yesterday.  My son told me he wanted a two piece helmet like the full time catcher, he said they looked cooler.  I  asked him if he remembered that shot to the back of his head in the Fall, he said he did but it wasn't too bad.  I said "When the umpire immediately calls the batter out and the OPPOSING team coach comes running for you after a play to see if you are okay it IS THAT BAD.  Had you been wearing that two piece helmet you would have been in the hospital or worse.  As long as you are catching you will wear the $150 hockey helmet.".

To my utter amazement my son simply said "Okay".  I said what no argument?  He said, nope, you make a good point...I thought for SURE pigs were flying!

CaCO3Girl: My son has been clamoring for a 2-piece catchers helmet for a few years (for the same crap reasons)and I always say no. No discussion. Sometimes it work to end a discussion before it begins. This should help curtail future discussions.

Am I missing something? You guys are talking about a mask and skull cap right? I think, as far as the back of the head is concerned they cover the same amount of head. Am I wrong on that. Now I know the hockey style covers the ears and the jaw a little better. My son wore the skull cap in 11u and loved it. The next year the AHSAA passed a rule that said you had to wear the hockey style so he went back to it. I think USSSA and most associations won't let you wear it any more. They are much cooler and you can hear better with them. But I say all that while my kid or any of the catchers I've coached have never been whacked in the head with a bat!

it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up.

old_school posted:

it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up.

I don't think you are imagining this correctly old_school.  My son was in the exact spot he was suppose to be.  The right handed batter is at the plate.  He is holding his bat with two hands, swings, and as he swing through he lets go of the bat with his right hand and the left one keeps the strong swing motion going in a giant circle as he twists his body....BAM...the bat hits my kid squarely in the back of the head.

PWPW posted:

Am I missing something? You guys are talking about a mask and skull cap right? I think, as far as the back of the head is concerned they cover the same amount of head. Am I wrong on that. Now I know the hockey style covers the ears and the jaw a little better. My son wore the skull cap in 11u and loved it. The next year the AHSAA passed a rule that said you had to wear the hockey style so he went back to it. I think USSSA and most associations won't let you wear it any more. They are much cooler and you can hear better with them. But I say all that while my kid or any of the catchers I've coached have never been whacked in the head with a bat!

PWPW, the mask and skull cap fly off with little provocation and have that lip on the back of the head.  If a bat hits that lip the two pieces are going to go flying off and the bat momentum will keep going as the mask and skull cap are flipping off, possibly even hitting the skull cap back into the kids head.

The main catcher on my sons team wears the mask and skull cap, there is really no comparison when it comes to safety, the hockey style mask encases the head securely and the skull cap is more like a loose bumper that may or may not be in the correct spot to save the catchers head.

old_school posted:

it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up.

Oh. So it's my 2017 son's fault he got hit by the same batter twice on different ABs? Not doing his job...right. Too close. He's caught hundreds of games with several thousand ABs on small and large diamonds and that's only happened with one batter on two different swings. Yes, clearly my son is doing something very, very wrong and the batter can do whatever the heck he wants on the backswing. Every other batter/AB non-issue, but this one kid. Geez, he really needs to change his whole approach to catching. Got it.

Wait. I was being sarcastic.

Clearly, the kid had a massive backswing that wrapped around far more than other batters because, if my son was getting nailed routinely, I'd take your cogent advice seriously.

Either way, I'm glad he was wearing the hockey-style helmet, which DOES provide far better protection to the sides and back of head.

CaCO3Girl posted:

old_school posted:

it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up.

I don't think you are imagining this correctly old_school.  My son was in the exact spot he was suppose to be.  The right handed batter is at the plate.  He is holding his bat with two hands, swings, and as he swing through he lets go of the bat with his right hand and the left one keeps the strong swing motion going in a giant circle as he twists his body....BAM...the bat hits my kid squarely in the back of the head.

oh I get it, I have seen it, the truth is the kid is in the box and swung - if the catcher got hit he is to close. Hell played catcher for many years...and occasionally (serveral times over the years) I got hit because I was always right up tight "right where u r supposed to be"

it happens.

old_school posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

old_school posted:

it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up.

I don't think you are imagining this correctly old_school.  My son was in the exact spot he was suppose to be.  The right handed batter is at the plate.  He is holding his bat with two hands, swings, and as he swing through he lets go of the bat with his right hand and the left one keeps the strong swing motion going in a giant circle as he twists his body....BAM...the bat hits my kid squarely in the back of the head.

oh I get it, I have seen it, the truth is the kid is in the box and swung - if the catcher got hit he is to close. Hell played catcher for many years...and occasionally (serveral times over the years) I got hit because I was always right up tight "right where u r supposed to be"

it happens.

Humm, can't say I get it now.  If the kid at bat had an arm length of 24 inches, his bat was 32 inches....my son would have had to been almost 5 feet away from the batter...um....yeah I don't see the ump being okay with that, or the pitcher for that matter, very hard to frame a pitch 5 feet off the plate, LOL!

Charlie Lau hitting approace.Still see it in the bigs from time to time.Guess theres still a few HC that use/teach it. 

old_school posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

old_school posted:

it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up.

I don't think you are imagining this correctly old_school.  My son was in the exact spot he was suppose to be.  The right handed batter is at the plate.  He is holding his bat with two hands, swings, and as he swing through he lets go of the bat with his right hand and the left one keeps the strong swing motion going in a giant circle as he twists his body....BAM...the bat hits my kid squarely in the back of the head.

oh I get it, I have seen it, the truth is the kid is in the box and swung - if the catcher got hit he is to close. Hell played catcher for many years...and occasionally (serveral times over the years) I got hit because I was always right up tight "right where u r supposed to be"

it happens.

Post a video.  My guess is the catcher isn't silent as he receives the pitch.  He moves forward.

I'll add that I was excessively sarcastic. Sorry. I did not even see the swings from the one kid who hit my son...twice. Only happened two time in 7 years of catching small and big diamonds year-round. Same kid, same game. Once. Weird. Twice and the umpire warns the hitter, I'm thinking he has some extreme extension and follow-through and has hit other catchers.

My son was catcher for many years - from age 10 (11U) to age 16 (17U).  He always was where he was suppose to be and rarely (if ever) got hit by a back swing.  For a batter to hit the catcher with his back swing he has to have a violent swing with only one hand holding the bat as he follows through. 

The only time my son actually got groggy was off a foul tip where the ball pegged him right between the eyes.  He was 11 or 12 at the time.  The ump knew something was wrong as my son literally fell back into the umps legs.  Coach immediately subbed another catcher in and put my son on the bench to recover.  Fortunately he did not show any signs additional signs of a concussion (vomiting, headache).

I agree the hockey style helmet (the only type son ever wore) is much safer than the mask-skull cap.

it took me 30 seconds to find these 2 links...pretty sure this argument is over. Seeing how they are MLB and SEC clips I feel it safe to say that it happens to good players, I am also pretty sure the catchers have a clue in what they are going.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWInkqIxCyA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHRMFvUbCuQ

proudhesmine posted:

Charlie Lau hitting approace.Still see it in the bigs from time to time.Guess theres still a few HC that use/teach it. 

yea that awful one hand follow...so dumb, only stupid people use it and teach it...in a quick internet search, like about 3 minutes I found video of - I hope the sarcasm is plenty obvious here.

McCutchen, Votto, Ramirez, Griffy, Pence, Pulois, Cabrera, Werth....all with a one handed finish...all guys with a variety of body types, approaches and objectives...they are obviously uninformed players from chicken sh!t organizations.

or maybe it isn't as dumb as you believe, maybe one hand or 2 doesn't matter and it is an individual thing, maybe there is more then one way to skin a cat as opposed to you know everything about a swing and there is only one approach to hitting...nope couldn't be that.

CaCO3Girl posted:

old_school posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

old_school posted:

it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up.

I don't think you are imagining this correctly old_school.  My son was in the exact spot he was suppose to be.  The right handed batter is at the plate.  He is holding his bat with two hands, swings, and as he swing through he lets go of the bat with his right hand and the left one keeps the strong swing motion going in a giant circle as he twists his body....BAM...the bat hits my kid squarely in the back of the head.

oh I get it, I have seen it, the truth is the kid is in the box and swung - if the catcher got hit he is to close. Hell played catcher for many years...and occasionally (serveral times over the years) I got hit because I was always right up tight "right where u r supposed to be"

it happens.

Humm, can't say I get it now.  If the kid at bat had an arm length of 24 inches, his bat was 32 inches....my son would have had to been almost 5 feet away from the batter...um....yeah I don't see the ump being okay with that, or the pitcher for that matter, very hard to frame a pitch 5 feet off the plate, LOL!

occasion you should consider looking at facts and video before you speak...or post as the case may be.

oh another one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXwLgto8-8w

old_school posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

old_school posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

old_school posted:

it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up.

I don't think you are imagining this correctly old_school.  My son was in the exact spot he was suppose to be.  The right handed batter is at the plate.  He is holding his bat with two hands, swings, and as he swing through he lets go of the bat with his right hand and the left one keeps the strong swing motion going in a giant circle as he twists his body....BAM...the bat hits my kid squarely in the back of the head.

oh I get it, I have seen it, the truth is the kid is in the box and swung - if the catcher got hit he is to close. Hell played catcher for many years...and occasionally (serveral times over the years) I got hit because I was always right up tight "right where u r supposed to be"

it happens.

Humm, can't say I get it now.  If the kid at bat had an arm length of 24 inches, his bat was 32 inches....my son would have had to been almost 5 feet away from the batter...um....yeah I don't see the ump being okay with that, or the pitcher for that matter, very hard to frame a pitch 5 feet off the plate, LOL!

occasion you should consider looking at facts and video before you speak...or post as the case may be.

I don't understand.  You said "it seems pretty obvious to me that if the catcher is getting hit he is to close...I don't think it matters if the kid has long loopy swing. He is batting and he is entitled to swing however he likes. the fact the swing is long means the catcher better pay attention and back up." 

I'm saying my kid would have to be 5 feet back to NOT get hit.  Where is the miscommunication here?

earlier in the tread there were several comments of the ump warning the hitter, which is obviously a stupid umpire. Then the innuendo was the kids swing was terrible and it was his fault. Then after I posted that it happens, wasn't a big deal and is part of the game, there was the sarcasm from one guy about his boy had played 100 games "on the big field" and your silly comment about needing to be 5' back. then we went into the one hand release being the culprit....

not a big deal, just that catching is tough job, you are going to hit and just because you get doesn't mean the batter did anything wrong or should change something he was doing...then I posted a couple links of big boys playing the game where they got hit in the same way...and guess what the catchers weren't and aren't going to be 5' back. I can also post a hundred or so links to swings by All-star MLB'ers with the same release...

your options are deal with getting hit from time to time or stop catching- there are no other options, the 5' back comment was just silly or complete lack of understanding on your part.

old_school posted:

earlier in the tread there were several comments of the ump warning the hitter, which is obviously a stupid umpire. Then the innuendo was the kids swing was terrible and it was his fault.

The umpire isn't stupid, but I think we have a stupid poster. The batter, by rule, is responsible for his followthrough.

The umpire's warning was an appropriate way of handling an oddity in the rule about follow through interference.

If the bat hits the catcher after the batter has swung at a pitch and hinders action at home plate or the catcher's attempt to play on a runner, it's followthrough interference, and the umpire starts calling people out and sending runners back.

However, if there's no action to hinder--say on a foul ball or a swing with less than two strikes and no runners on base--the same followthrough is not interference and incurs no penalty.

That doesn't mean it's okay to conk the catcher in the head with a bat. 

Warning the batter is a reasonable response to avoid repeating an unsafe situation.

I believe the catcher was too far away from this batter.  The easy solution is to move up too far, just avoiding the primary swing to the ball and let the ump get hit with the back swing.  Would only take once.

Thanks for posting those videos. Of course, I've seen a few of MLB catchers hit by the backswing. And yes, probably largely or virtually entirely dominated by batters extending a follow-through or who routinely finish one-handed, which includes my son. I have no idea if he's ever hit a catcher on a back-swing, but I have no recollection of it. All of this still makes feel even more strongly that a hockey-style catchers mask is the way to go. Oh, and I said hundreds of games, not 100. Big difference. But I was being excessively sarcastic, for which I apologized.

I believe this thread has run its course....

Batty67 posted:

Thanks for posting those videos. Of course, I've seen a few of MLB catchers hit by the backswing. And yes, probably largely or virtually entirely dominated by batters extending a follow-through or who routinely finish one-handed, which includes my son. I have no idea if he's ever hit a catcher on a back-swing, but I have no recollection of it. All of this still makes feel even more strongly that a hockey-style catchers mask is the way to go. Oh, and I said hundreds of games, not 100. Big difference. But I was being excessively sarcastic, for which I apologized.

I believe this thread has run its course....

FWIW, mask and skull cap is not legal under federation rules for high school baseball. Doesn't meet NOCSAE standards or provide full ear protection.

Swampboy posted:

The umpire's warning was an appropriate way of handling an oddity in the rule about follow through interference.

If the bat hits the catcher after the batter has swung at a pitch and hinders action at home plate or the catcher's attempt to play on a runner, it's followthrough interference, and the umpire starts calling people out and sending runners back.

However, if there's no action to hinder--say on a foul ball or a swing with less than two strikes and no runners on base--the same followthrough is not interference and incurs no penalty.

That doesn't mean it's okay to conk the catcher in the head with a bat. 

Warning the batter is a reasonable response to avoid repeating an unsafe situation.

I would have to see video of each swing/contact.  My lefty swinging son has hit catcher's on the glove arm before on an inside and low pitch where the catcher reaches forward to catch it as a backhand.  Think of the catchers glove reaching out to catch a ball that almost hits lefty batters back foot.  Backswing hits catcher in arm.  Catcher is hurt, parents go nuts.  Umpire warns hitter because of uproar from parents.  All batter did was swing at a pitch (he probably shouldn't have).  

Matt13 posted:

old_school posted:

earlier in the tread there were several comments of the ump warning the hitter, which is obviously a stupid umpire. Then the innuendo was the kids swing was terrible and it was his fault.

The umpire isn't stupid, but I think we have a stupid poster. The batter, by rule, is responsible for his followthrough.

Hmmmmm

Matt13 posted:

old_school posted:

earlier in the tread there were several comments of the ump warning the hitter, which is obviously a stupid umpire. Then the innuendo was the kids swing was terrible and it was his fault.

The umpire isn't stupid, but I think we have a stupid poster. The batter, by rule, is responsible for his followthrough.

Funny I didn't see one MLB ump issue a warning to the hitter, they probably don't know the rules. 

old_school posted:

Matt13 posted:

old_school posted:

earlier in the tread there were several comments of the ump warning the hitter, which is obviously a stupid umpire. Then the innuendo was the kids swing was terrible and it was his fault.

The umpire isn't stupid, but I think we have a stupid poster. The batter, by rule, is responsible for his followthrough.

Funny I didn't see one MLB ump issue a warning to the hitter, they probably don't know the rules. 

Funny, I didn't see one kid playing MLB. Go back under your bridge.

Matt13 posted:

old_school posted:

Matt13 posted:

old_school posted:

earlier in the tread there were several comments of the ump warning the hitter, which is obviously a stupid umpire. Then the innuendo was the kids swing was terrible and it was his fault.

The umpire isn't stupid, but I think we have a stupid poster. The batter, by rule, is responsible for his followthrough.

Funny I didn't see one MLB ump issue a warning to the hitter, they probably don't know the rules. 

Funny, I didn't see one kid playing MLB. Go back under your bridge.

That has what to do with rules? 

Old School, 

When I officiated high school football, it was not uncommon for coaches and fans to scream about my crew's rulings based on what they thought they knew about football rules from watching TV.

For example, I don't know how many times I heard someone yell, "That was uncatchable!" to protest a pass interference call, which was an irrelevant observation because the word "uncatchable" didn't appear in the high school rule book.

The same situation applies to this thread. You keep bringing up MLB examples, which shed no light on a situation that happened in a high school game played under high school rules. 

You've heard from two high school umpires. Neither of us thinks the umpire was out of line to say something the second time a particular player hit the catcher in a game where nobody else had any trouble avoiding him.

MLB handles these situations differently. For example, I looked up the box score and play-by play of the last MLB example you provided. The batter was hit by the next pitch--which is exactly how we don't want it handled in high school games.

Yea I know, I also spoke with 2 high school umpires this week who

1. Disagree with you on you role or perceived role.

2. Tell me there is no rule written as clearly as Mr Matt would like us to believe. At best it would be his interpretation 

but much as Matt calls me a troll I already know he has power issues But just because he shouts louder doesn't mean he is correct 

There is a rule, but it comes into play only when the follow through hinders the catcher's attempt to make a play--with no runners on base and less than two strikes it wouldn't apply; it also wouldn't apply on a foul.

In those situations where it doesn't apply, saying something as this umpire did falls under the category of preventive officiating. It's appropriate to say something even though the play that just happened doesn't warrant an interference call. Not required. Often helpful. It is widely recognized as an effective practice.

Similar examples would be when a runner makes an illegal slide on a force play that doesn't interfere with the fielder but would have if he had got there sooner. If I'm the plate umpire who has come out to the mound to observe the slide while the base umpire covers the throw to first, I may have nothing on that play, but the runner needs to know what he did could cause problems, and I'll tell him as he trots back to his dugout. 

Fair enough then we can agree that exactly how how I stated it is correct

no rule is clearly written and it would require an umpires interpretation, not all umpires would agree, I don't agree with you or Matt, it doesn't make me a troll. 

Nor does it make the umpire in the OP stupid. 

Swampboy posted:

Nor does it make the umpire in the OP stupid. 

Fair enough