Incredible story, extreme sportsmanship. Does it belong in sports?

[Axxon]

With two runners on base and a strike against her, Sara Tucholsky of Western Oregon University uncorked her best swing and did something she had never done, in high school or college. Her first home run cleared the centerfield fence.

But it appeared to be the shortest of dreams come true when she missed first base, started back to tag it and collapsed with a knee injury.

She crawled back to first but could do no more. The first-base coach said she would be called out if her teammates tried to help her. Or, the umpire said, a pinch runner could be called in, and the homer would count as a single.

Then, members of the Central Washington University softball team stunned spectators by carrying Tucholsky around the bases Saturday so the three-run homer would count — an act that contributed to their own elimination from the playoffs.

Central Washington first baseman Mallory Holtman, the career home run leader in the Great Northwest Athletic Conference, asked the umpire if she and her teammates could help Tucholsky.

The umpire said there was no rule against it.

So Holtman and shortstop Liz Wallace put their arms under Tucholsky's legs, and she put her arms over their shoulders. The three headed around the basepaths, stopping to let Tucholsky touch each base with her uninjured leg.

"The only thing I remember is that Mallory asked me which leg was the one that hurt," Tucholsky said. "I told her it was my right leg and she said, 'Okay, we're going to drop you down gently and you need to touch it with your left leg,' and I said, 'Okay, thank you very much.' "

"We started laughing when we touched second base," Holtman said. "I said, 'I wonder what this must look like to other people.' "

"We didn't know that she was a senior or that this was her first home run," Wallace said Wednesday. "That makes the story more touching than it was. We just wanted to help her."

Tucholsky's injury is a possible torn ligament that will sideline her for the rest of the season, and she plans to graduate in the spring with a degree in business. Her homer sent Western Oregon to a 4-2 victory, ending Central Washington's chances of winning the conference and advancing to the playoffs.

As for Tucholsky, the 5-foot-2 rightfielder was focused on her pain. "I really didn't say too much. I was trying to breathe," she told the Associated Press in a telephone interview Wednesday.

"I hope I would do the same for her in the same situation," Tucholsky said.

As the trio reached home plate, Tucholsky said, the entire Western Oregon team was in tears.

For coach Pam Knox, the gesture resolved the dilemma the injury presented. "She was going to kill me if we sub and take (the homer) away. But at the same time I was concerned for her."

"In the end, it is not about winning and losing so much," Holtman said. "It was about this girl. She hit it over the fence and was in pain, and she deserved a home run."


hxxp://www.tampabay.com/sports/colleges/article481640.ece

This is a great story and it's even more dramatic since the team was eliminated from the playoffs. Still, I wonder if this was something that really belongs in sports, especially the playoffs.

So, if you had the chance to do something like this during a sports contest would you? How about in an elimination game like this?

I'd like to say that I would and if the idea was brought up I might but honestly, it'd never occur to me on my own.

Oh, and it looks like once again there's crying in baseball.

[Lathum]

I think it belongs in amature sports

[Axxon]

I think it belongs in amature sports

Yes, agreed, but does it belong in amateur sports??:p

[Eaglesfan27]

I think it belongs in H.S. and college (amateur sports) but I couldn't see doing this in a professional game. I'm not sure if I would do the same thing in the same situation. I'm almost certain this wouldn't have occurred to me on my own. Great story.

[Marc Vaughan]

I think it should be present in all sports at any level - its a heart warming story about people not taking advantage of someones misfortune.

Things I remember fondly from professional soccer include penalties being missed on purpose when a player has considered them incorrectly given by a referee - that sort of decision is hard for someone to make but its the 'right thing to do' and thats never wrong imho ..

[spleen1015]

I don't think you'd see this outta men.

[Axxon]

I think it should be present in all sports at any level - its a heart warming story about people not taking advantage of someones misfortune.

Things I remember fondly from professional soccer include penalties being missed on purpose when a player has considered them incorrectly given by a referee - that sort of decision is hard for someone to make but its the 'right thing to do' and thats never wrong imho ..

My concern with all this is that it quickly devolves from sports to sports entertainment. If you appeal to the referee and say he got something wrong and it benefits the other team, that's sportsmanship. It's like a moral instant replay kinda.

But in a case like this, we're kind saying that fate and chance plays no part in sports but isn't that one of the appeals of sports is you never know what's gonna happen?

Tough call for me because the right thing to do is help her but the sports thing to do seems like it might be different.

[Axxon]

I don't think you'd see this outta men.

I was wondering who would bring this up first but it certainly was on my mind when I posted the thread.

/ edited to make clear that my question about sportsmanship had nothing to do with this issue. This was more of a human nature observation in addition to the sports question.

[Sgran]

when i play sports I want to feel like I won the game because we deserved to win. If you win because someone sprains their knee rounding the bases it would be a hollow victory. It's like guys calling phantom fouls in a pick-up basketball game or argue about a travelling call. Believe me, I'm as competitive as anyone, but games should be played according to the spirit of the game, not to the letter of the law. This is why I hate Bruce Bowen crap and hate when a pro player lavishes praise on someone who "does what it takes to win" when they really mean "he's good at cheating and so I'm not going to call him out."

[MJ4H]

Does sportsmanship belong in sports? Great question.

[Axxon]

when i play sports I want to feel like I won the game because we deserved to win. If you win because someone sprains their knee rounding the bases it would be a hollow victory. It's like guys calling phantom fouls in a pick-up basketball game or argue about a travelling call. Believe me, I'm as competitive as anyone, but games should be played according to the spirit of the game, not to the letter of the law. This is why I hate Bruce Bowen crap and hate when a pro player lavishes praise on someone who "does what it takes to win" when they really mean "he's good at cheating and so I'm not going to call him out."

I understand the phantom fouls and cheating but none of that happened here. She hurt herself rounding a base. This speaks of her physical condition and training and aren't these part of what sports are about.

It seems to follow that line we should throw the ball back from the outfield slower of there's a slow hitter so he can have the hit a faster runner would have earned with her wheels.

We'd have to not knock out the weak chinned boxer, slow down for the exhausted marathoner, etc.

OK, enough sliding down the slippery slope into hyperbole town but really, isn't there a slippery slope here?

[Eaglesfan27]

I understand the phantom fouls and cheating but none of that happened here. She hurt herself rounding a base. This speaks of her physical condition and training and aren't these part of what sports are about.

It seems to follow that line we should throw the ball back from the outfield slower of there's a slow hitter so he can have the hit a faster runner would have earned with her wheels.

We'd have to not knock out the weak chinned boxer, slow down for the exhausted marathoner, etc.

OK, enough sliding down the slippery slope into hyperbole town but really, isn't there a slippery slope here?

Does a torn knee ligament really speak to her condition and training? They can happen to the best trained athletes in the world and are usually the unfortunate result of circumstances. She legally hit the homerun, and it's only a technicality of the rules that is going to stop her from scoring once she hurts herself, and I don't see the slope you propose as really being applicable to this situation.

[Vince]

I think this is different Axxon because it doesn't matter WHO hit that homerun, they'd be able to round the bases "fast enough" to make it home safely. This was a random, freak occurence during a part of the play where athletic physical condition should have NOTHING to do with whether or not she can successfully complete the play.

[Axxon]

I think this is different Axxon because it doesn't matter WHO hit that homerun, they'd be able to round the bases "fast enough" to make it home safely. This was a random, freak occurence during a part of the play where athletic physical condition should have NOTHING to do with whether or not she can successfully complete the play.

I get what you're saying but if a marathoner collapses at the finish line because he pulled a muscle then they should help him win?

Not exhaustion but just a freak landing that twisted his knee, exactly like the injury that happened to her.

Same with a football player falling from the exact same injury while he's in the open and about to score a TD.

I guess it really matters what role you think injuries should play in sports.

[MJ4H]

This is more akin to a golfer having his arm chopped off after winning the Masters and he cant sign his scorecard. If you dont do something to help him, you are a douchebag imo.

[Axxon]

Does a torn knee ligament really speak to her condition and training? They can happen to the best trained athletes in the world and are usually the unfortunate result of circumstances. She legally hit the homerun, and it's only a technicality of the rules that is going to stop her from scoring once she hurts herself, and I don't see the slope you propose as really being applicable to this situation.

Right, but I can't think of any sports that allow changed results due to injury. Unfortunate results of circumstance are part of the bread and butter of sports that's exactly what I was saying.

Winfield hitting a pigeon, Ray Guy hitting the tv's in the superdome, a fan reaching over and robbing a player of a catch, these are all unfortunate results of circumstance too but we don't correct for them.

[Vince]

I get what you're saying but if a marathoner collapses at the finish line because he pulled a muscle then they should help him win?

Not exhaustion but just a freak landing that twisted his knee, exactly like the injury that happened to her.

Same with a football player falling from the exact same injury while he's in the open and about to score a TD.

I guess it really matters what role you think injuries should play in sports.

See, I think it's the nature of Baseball/Softball here that makes this different. In those instances you've named, play is still "live." Baseball's almost like a turn-based strategy game. The action isn't live or ongoing once that ball leaves the field of play. Everyone just stands around waiting for the runner to score. I tend to think it's more like MJ4H put so eloquently :)

[Axxon]

Does a torn knee ligament really speak to her condition and training? They can happen to the best trained athletes in the world and are usually the unfortunate result of circumstances. She legally hit the homerun, and it's only a technicality of the rules that is going to stop her from scoring once she hurts herself, and I don't see the slope you propose as really being applicable to this situation.

Right, but I can't think of any sports that allow changed results due to injury. Unfortunate results of circumstance are part of the bread and butter of sports that's exactly what I was saying.

Steve Bartmanthese was an unfortunate result of circumstance as well but no one corrected that too. Shit happens, that just seems to go hand in hand with sports IMHO.

[Axxon]

This is more akin to a golfer having his arm chopped off after winning the Masters and he cant sign his scorecard. If you dont do something to help him, you are a douchebag imo.

Sure, because if you don't do something to help him, he'll likely bleed to death. :D

But seriously, you're saying you don't really need to touch all the bases to score a home run? It's not a run until you do that. Baseball is full of anectdotes of guys who miss bases and are robbed of homeruns. The points don't count until that happens. It's in the rules. I think the douchebag comment is way out of line in this discussion IMHO.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

It's a hell of a lot better than parents who damn near kill each other and coaches over their talentless kids.

[Axxon]

See, I think it's the nature of Baseball/Softball here that makes this different. In those instances you've named, play is still "live." Baseball's almost like a turn-based strategy game. The action isn't live or ongoing once that ball leaves the field of play. Everyone just stands around waiting for the runner to score. I tend to think it's more like MJ4H put so eloquently :)

Again, that's not true even on homeruns, the play is very much live until you cross home plate.

Here's the rule



NCAA women's softball rule 8.5.3.2:

If an injury to a batter-runner or runner prevents her from proceeding to an awarded base, the ball is dead and substitution may be made. The substitute must legally touch all awarded or missed bases not previously touched.


There is a rule and the umpire correctly called it. She gets the bases not previously touched when the ball is ruled dead.

Think of the same thing on a hit in the gap. Does she get third base because they presume she'd get a triple or the base she was entitled to before the injury?

According to the umpire and the rule book, she only gets one base.

[Cringer]

I think the real question should be, were the three chicks atleast average looking or better, and was there hands on ass or any other interesting place while they carried her?

That my friends, belongs in girls college softball.

[Axxon]

Actually, what would have been cool is if they'd have carried her all the way to home but just before touching it, one of them pulled out the ball and tagged her out. :D

OK, I'm evil.

[JonInMiddleGA]

One of the more interesting things in the aftermath of all this is that if the rule had been interpreted correctly at the time, none of this would have been necessary.

As one of the umpires involved in the game between Central Washington and Western Oregon confirmed in an e-mail to ESPN.com, the rule in question was misinterpreted on the field after Tucholsky's injury and later clarified by the NCAA.According to page 105, rule 8.5.3.2 of the NCAA softball rule book, "If an injury to a batter-runner or runner prevents her from proceeding to an awarded base, the ball is dead and the substitution can be made. The substitute must legally touch all awarded or missed bases not previously touched."

[JonInMiddleGA]

According to the umpire and the rule book, she only gets one base.

Umm ... nope. (see my post above)

The umps actually blew the call & have acknowledged it.

[Axxon]

Umm ... nope. (see my post above)

The umps actually blew the call & have acknowledged it.

See, this just doesn't make any sense. Had she touched second base before the injury she would have been out. She's not exactly awarded the home run in that case.

If homeruns are automatically granted why even bother to run them out and risk injuries? Not saying you're wrong but the whole thing is jacked up.

Either it's preawarded or its not and again, in this case had she hit second before the injury ( she had missed first and the injury was when she returned to tag it ) she would NOT have had a homerun but somehow it was magically awarded according to that rule in either situation.

[Vince]

Again, that's not true even on homeruns, the play is very much live until you cross home plate.

You're right...but the team in the field can't do anything about it. They have to stand and watch. It's not like one of them could pull some heroic save and stop the home run once it has left the yard. So it is "live" -- but not really.

[JonInMiddleGA]

See, this just doesn't make any sense. Had she touched second base before the injury she would have been out. She's not exactly awarded the home run in that case. If homeruns are automatically granted why even bother to run them out and risk injuries? Not saying you're wrong but the whole thing is jacked up. Either it's preawarded or its not and again, in this case had she hit second before the injury ( she had missed first and the injury was when she returned to tag it ) she would NOT have had a homerun but somehow it was magically awarded according to that rule in either situation.

But she didn't touch second before returning to first, rendering that point moot ... otherwise I think this might indeed become a different situation

Here's how I'm reading the subsequent interpretation: She remains entitled to the four bases unless something else happens to negate that. And nothing to negate that happened, since the NCAA softball rulebook has a mechanism in place to cover this particular situation. The substitute for an injured player appears to act as a proxy for the original runner, assuming the same entitlement that player had prior to the injury. And in this case, nothing had occurred that reduced the entitled bases (as the injury itself does not change anything per the rule book).

[Axxon]

But she didn't touch second before returning to first, rendering that point moot ... otherwise I think this might indeed become a different situation

Here's how I'm reading the subsequent interpretation: She remains entitled to the four bases unless something else happens to negate that. And nothing to negate that happened, since the NCAA softball rulebook has a mechanism in place to cover this particular situation. The substitute for an injured player appears to act as a proxy for the original runner, assuming the same entitlement that player had prior to the injury. And in this case, nothing had occurred that reduced the entitled bases (as the injury itself does not change anything per the rule book).

I agree that's the interpretation that's why we need to do away with making them run the bases. The only reason we run them is in case someone misses a base which probably doesn't happen much more than someone getting injured and this woman was injured for zero reason since her base was already awarded. Stupid, stupid rule.

[Axxon]

But she didn't touch second before returning to first, rendering that point moot ... otherwise I think this might indeed become a different situation


There'd have been no situation. She'd have been out and she would have remained uninjured.

[SFL Cat]

Nice story...boring discussion.

[OldGiants]

I don't think you'd see this outta men.

I would have manned-up and crawled, dragging my bum leg behind me, even if it took several hours to round the bases.

That's the real difference between men and women.

[BrianD]

Is this really any different than a soccer player kicking the ball into touch to let an opponent get medical treatment...and then the other team returning the favor after treatment is given? Athletes tend to play loose with the rules, but there is something different with injuries.

[MJ4H]

Sure, because if you don't do something to help him, he'll likely bleed to death. :D

But seriously, you're saying you don't really need to touch all the bases to score a home run? It's not a run until you do that. Baseball is full of anectdotes of guys who miss bases and are robbed of homeruns. The points don't count until that happens. It's in the rules. I think the douchebag comment is way out of line in this discussion IMHO.

No, I'm saying you do. The athletic part is simply hitting the home run. The rest is just a technicality like signing your scorecard. I'm not saying you don't have to sign your scorecard, I'm saying you shouldn't lose because something unfortunate happens that prevents you from doing so.

As far as the d-bag comment, I stand behind it. I'm not calling anyone in this discussion one (unless you admit you wouldn't assist the guy that just got his arm chopped off).

[Crim]

This is more akin to a golfer having his arm chopped off after winning the Masters and he cant sign his scorecard. If you dont do something to help him, you are a douchebag imo.

I don't even agree with your point, MJ4H, but this was a great post!

[Crim]

I don't specifically have a problem with what the opposing team did in this situation. But someone talked about a slippery slope -- I think a bit farther down this slope, and much more eggregious, was when some female college basketball player -- can't remember her name -- was a point or two short of tying/breaking the career points record, and she had a season ending knee injury. The coaches agreed to let her in the game to score an uncontested layup, so breaking the record. Way worse than what happened in this softball game, imho, but still it's on the same slope. Just farther down it.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I don't specifically have a problem with what the opposing team did in this situation. But someone talked about a slippery slope -- I think a bit farther down this slope, and much more eggregious, was when some female college basketball player -- can't remember her name -- was a point or two short of tying/breaking the career points record, and she had a season ending knee injury. The coaches agreed to let her in the game to score an uncontested layup, so breaking the record. Way worse than what happened in this softball game, imho, but still it's on the same slope. Just farther down it.
No comment on the point being made here, but if I remember correctly, that player was Nykesha Sales. Just filling in the name for ya.

[KWhit]

Great story and they did a great thing by helping her. I wish this kind of thing was done more in sports.

[CU Tiger]

Just talked to a friend who is an NCAA Softball Ump...

Turns out the substitute runner couldd have still finished the trot and scored, the official score keeping would be a single by the injured playeer, and 3 advanced on fielding by the sub runner. So it was all about the homerun not the score....

Also someone mentioned if she touched second she would be out, I should have asked Rick but I BELIEVE this is not factual, I believe you can return
and touch the missed base even if a further base is touched (this is often screwed up in video game I know).

I'm thinking George Brett Pine tar here, if touching a further base yields an out why even appeal and throw to the base? Simply stating the further base had been touched would net the out.

[Chief Rum]

I don't think you'd see this outta men.

I would do it. Right is right, regardless of gender, and she hit that homerun fair and square.

Even before I got to the part where the other university helped her, I was already thinking that's what they would do.

[Draft Dodger]

This is more akin to a golfer having his arm chopped off after winning the Masters and he cant sign his scorecard. If you dont do something to help him, you are a douchebag imo.

on the great big list of ridiculously dumb analogies, this one might be at #1.

[stevew]

I don't specifically have a problem with what the opposing team did in this situation. But someone talked about a slippery slope -- I think a bit farther down this slope, and much more eggregious, was when some female college basketball player -- can't remember her name -- was a point or two short of tying/breaking the career points record, and she had a season ending knee injury. The coaches agreed to let her in the game to score an uncontested layup, so breaking the record. Way worse than what happened in this softball game, imho, but still it's on the same slope. Just farther down it.

That was utterly rediculous

[ISiddiqui]

I would have manned-up and crawled, dragging my bum leg behind me, even if it took several hours to round the bases.

That's the real difference between men and women.

Hey, you never know, maybe Central Wash players did it because they didn't want to sit there for hours while the woman slowly dragged herself around (after all, there is no time limit on this thing).

[stevew]

Hey, you never know, maybe Central Wash players did it because they didn't want to sit there for hours while the woman slowly dragged herself around (after all, there is no time limit on this thing).

reminds me of the home run trots in world series basebabll 93. Those things took forever

[Axxon]

Just talked to a friend who is an NCAA Softball Ump...

Turns out the substitute runner couldd have still finished the trot and scored, the official score keeping would be a single by the injured playeer, and 3 advanced on fielding by the sub runner. So it was all about the homerun not the score....

Also someone mentioned if she touched second she would be out, I should have asked Rick but I BELIEVE this is not factual, I believe you can return
and touch the missed base even if a further base is touched (this is often screwed up in video game I know).

I'm thinking George Brett Pine tar here, if touching a further base yields an out why even appeal and throw to the base? Simply stating the further base had been touched would net the out.

MLB is very clear on the rule about accidents which is really cool.


(c) When an accident incapacitates a player or an umpire;
(1) If an accident to a runner is such as to prevent him from proceeding to a base to which he is entitled, as on a home run hit out of the playing field, or an award of one or more bases, a substitute runner shall be permitted to complete the play.


but on the advance thing, here's the rule:

7.02 In advancing, a runner shall touch first, second, third and home base in order. If forced to return, he shall retouch all bases in reverse order, unless the ball is dead under any provision of Rule 5.09. In such cases, the runner may go directly to his original base.

5.09

5.09 The ball becomes dead and runners advance one base, or return to their bases, without liability to be put out, when—
(a) A pitched ball touches a batter, or his clothing, while in his legal batting position; runners, if forced, advance;
(b) The plate umpire interferes with the catcher’s throw; runners may not advance.
NOTE: The interference shall be disregarded if the catcher’s throw retires the runner.
(c) A balk is committed; runners advance; (See Penalty 8.05).
(d) A ball is illegally batted; runners return;
(e) A foul ball is not caught; runners return. The umpire shall not put the ball in play until all runners have retouched their bases;
(f) A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair territory before it touches an infielder including the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has passed an infielder other than the pitcher.
Rule 5.09(f) Comment: If a fair ball touches an umpire working in the infield after it has bounded past, or over, the pitcher, it is a dead ball. If a batted ball is deflected by a fielder in fair territory and hits a runner or an umpire while still in flight and then caught by an infielder it shall not be a catch, but the ball shall remain in play.
If a fair ball goes through, or by, an infielder, and touches a runner immediately back of him, or touches a runner after being deflected by an infielder, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out. In making such decision the umpire must be convinced that the ball passed through, or by, the infielder and that no other infielder had the chance to make a play on the ball; runners advance, if forced:
Rule 5.09 to 5.10
47
(g) A pitched ball lodges in the umpire’s or catcher’s mask or paraphernalia, and remains out of play, runners advance one base;
Rule 5.09(g) Comment: If a foul tip hits the umpire and is caught by a fielder on the rebound, the ball is “dead” and the batsman cannot be called out. The same shall apply where such foul tip lodges in the umpire’s mask or other paraphernalia.
If a third strike (not a foul tip) passes the catcher and hits an umpire, the ball is in play. If such ball rebounds and is caught by a fielder before it touches the ground, the batsman is not out on such a catch, but the ball remains in play and the batsman may be retired at first base, or touched with the ball for the out.
If a pitched ball lodges in the umpire’s or catcher’s mask or paraphernalia, and remains out of play, on the third strike or fourth ball, then the batter is entitled to first base and all runners advance one base. If the count on the batter is less than three balls, runners advance one base.
(h) Any legal pitch touches a runner trying to score; runners advance.

As I see it, there is no provision which would call a homerun that is not retrievable to ever be called a dead ball so there are countless live balls still out there which just underlines how silly the rules are anyway.

[MJ4H]

on the great big list of ridiculously dumb analogies, this one might be at #1.

:D

[Passacaglia]

I think it should be present in all sports at any level - its a heart warming story about people not taking advantage of someones misfortune.

Things I remember fondly from professional soccer include penalties being missed on purpose when a player has considered them incorrectly given by a referee - that sort of decision is hard for someone to make but its the 'right thing to do' and thats never wrong imho ..

My FM team does this all the time.

[RPI-Fan]

Just talked to a friend who is an NCAA Softball Ump...

Turns out the substitute runner couldd have still finished the trot and scored, the official score keeping would be a single by the injured playeer, and 3 advanced on fielding by the sub runner. So it was all about the homerun not the score....

Also someone mentioned if she touched second she would be out, I should have asked Rick but I BELIEVE this is not factual, I believe you can return
and touch the missed base even if a further base is touched (this is often screwed up in video game I know).

I'm thinking George Brett Pine tar here, if touching a further base yields an out why even appeal and throw to the base? Simply stating the further base had been touched would net the out.

No, it was not just about the homerun. Earlier in the thread it was clearly stated that the umps misinterpreted the rule and were going to make the substitute stay at first base.

[MrDNA]

The real question for me is, if it's your only homerun ever, how do you not take the time to enjoy the trot and hit all the goshdarn bases?

[Julio Riddols]

I would do it for damn sure.. If someone beats me at something I feel like they deserved it because I know I gave em all I had. I can't stand not trying.. So if they deserve a win, or a home run, or a couple free throws, I would go out of my way to ensure they got what they deserved. If theres anything I hate more than losing, its winning by a technicality.

[Axxon]

The real question for me is, if it's your only homerun ever, how do you not take the time to enjoy the trot and hit all the goshdarn bases?

I'm guessing extreme excitement and getting caught up in the moment. I'm not like that but I know lots of people who would have done what she did minus the injury which she really didn't do, it just happened.

Remember, this was not only her first homerun it was the potential winning run in a knockout playoff game. That was probably the first excitement and the realization it was her first homerun came later.

[Vince]

As someone who played a TON of baseball before ever hitting a homerun in competitive play, I'm 100% certain she knew immediately that it was her first ever homerun. The fact that the runs were huge was likely #1b on the realization list.

Edit - A non-inside-the-park Homerun. I had lots of those before putting one over the fence.

[14ers]

hxxp://www.tampabay.com/sports/colleges/article481640.ece

This is a great story and it's even more dramatic since the team was eliminated from the playoffs. Still, I wonder if this was something that really belongs in sports, especially the playoffs.


If this was their attitude, why even keep score? But, I guess this is why we are starting to see many junior sports not keep score anymore.


Why not just award her the homerun, even before she hits the ball, to be nice?

[larrymcg421]

If this was their attitude, why even keep score? But, I guess this is why we are starting to see many junior sports not keep score anymore.


Why not just award her the homerun, even before she hits the ball, to be nice?

My guess is she would have crawled around the bases if she had to. Making her do that seems extremely cruel, on top of being a waste of time. She hit the home run and was entitled to all four bases. An injury doesn't change that.

[14ers]

She hit the home run and was entitled to all four bases. An injury doesn't change that.
Actually, if you read the rules an injury does change that.


And, I for one still get choked up seeing Kirk Gibson limp around the bases to score his homerun in the World Series.

[larrymcg421]

Actually, if you read the rules an injury does change that.


Nope, the rules say a substitute can come in and touch all awarded bases.


And, I for one still get choked up seeing Kirk Gibson limp around the bases to score his homerun in the World Series.

That's nice, but he wasn't injured nearly to the extent this girl was. If he was, then I bet he would have crawled to each base if necessary, and I'm confident that this girl would have done the same thing. I'm glad that the opposing team figured something out so she didn't have to do it.

[Schmidty]

People that are arguing about this from even a devil's advocate point of view, are fucking assholes and need to get a lesson in humanity 101. Perspective is a wonderful thing. Dispassionate objection has it's place, but this is fucking amateur SPORTS!!!!

Stuff like this just solidifies my stance that the only true athletes anymore are women. Competitors with honor, emotion and ethics.

I didn't even get "choked up" from this story, but it's quite obvious that the rule (as it was incorrectly interpreted) was purely about semantics. Maybe it's just me, but if I had won a playoff game because of a technicality like this one, I could not have lived with myself. Maybe that makes me a wuss. Or maybe it makes me an honorable man.

The opponent's actions were commendable, but should not have even been necessary. The fact that these women were mature and selfless enough to just automatically do it (and not argue about the kind of shit some of you have in this thread), is a testament to true, fair competition.

Bah. I am so sick of cynical, pseudo-intellectual arguments about stuff like this.

[kingnebwsu]

People have to argue about something on all internet message boards. It's just the nature of the beast.

Example thread title could be "I like puppies"

Replies would include:
"Puppies rock dood"
"U suck. Cats r definately better"
"I think the history of dogs in this country clearly defines the dog, or puppy in this case, as man's best friend. This therefore makes the dog the clearly superior animal, or pet if you will. Without puppies, you would have a feline world where lizards are king and why did my wife leave me today? I don't understand it. She was a truly maddening woman who, coincidentally, liked Madden football. Oh yeah...puppies rock."

[JonInMiddleGA]

The opponent's actions were commendable, but should not have even been necessary.

As it turns out, that's the part of the story that really jumps out at me.
One of the stranger examples of a blown call I can ever remember.

The fact that these women were mature and selfless enough to just automatically do it (and not argue about the kind of shit some of you have in this thread), is a testament to true, fair competition.

I strongly object to the implication that there would have been anything inappropriate ("true, fair") about the opponents taking no action that could cost them the game. If they act within the rules, I see no problem with inaction here. And (had the original interpretation been correct) I would have had a serious problem ever lining up again with people who deliberately tried to give the game away. Given the eventual revelation of the correct ruling, it was effectively a moot point, but I can't imagine I would have ever wanted to play alongside those players again.

I mean, we're talking about an inaction that would have been well within the confines of the rules here. And if you aren't playing to win then what's the f'n point in playing at all? In some ways this is even worse than the gimme basket example mentioned up the thread.

edit to add: Nothing particularly intellectual (psuedo or otherwise) about any of that at all. Just one guy's honest two cents about their reaction to the situation. Not sure I'm seeing a problem with people tossing it around that way or otherwise, same thing that would happen at a water cooler or at lunch.

[Horizon]

Nope, the rules say a substitute can come in and touch all awarded bases.


Then why didn't they just do this?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Then why didn't they just do this?

Because the umps (nor the coaches, nor anybody else apparently) knew how the rule should be applied.

[SirFozzie]

It's happened in Major League Baseball as well.

2005, Red Sox game. Gabe Kapler was on first when Tony Graffanino hit a line drive to left. While rounding 2nd, Kapler's knee gave way just as the ball went over the field for a homer. He was unable to complete the trip around the bases, because he had ruptured his left Achilles' tendon. The Sox were allowed to substitute a pinch runner for Kapler to complete the trot around the bases.

[MJ4H]

People that are arguing about this from even a devil's advocate point of view, are fucking assholes and need to get a lesson in humanity 101. Perspective is a wonderful thing. Dispassionate objection has it's place, but this is fucking amateur SPORTS!!!!

Stuff like this just solidifies my stance that the only true athletes anymore are women. Competitors with honor, emotion and ethics.

I didn't even get "choked up" from this story, but it's quite obvious that the rule (as it was incorrectly interpreted) was purely about semantics. Maybe it's just me, but if I had won a playoff game because of a technicality like this one, I could not have lived with myself. Maybe that makes me a wuss. Or maybe it makes me an honorable man.

The opponent's actions were commendable, but should not have even been necessary. The fact that these women were mature and selfless enough to just automatically do it (and not argue about the kind of shit some of you have in this thread), is a testament to true, fair competition.

Bah. I am so sick of cynical, pseudo-intellectual arguments about stuff like this.

Good post and I agree 100%

[Eaglesfan27]

I think the real question should be, were the three chicks atleast average looking or better, and was there hands on ass or any other interesting place while they carried her?

That my friends, belongs in girls college softball.

There is video on ESPN now. They aren't hot, but they aren't terrible looking.

[BrianD]

I strongly object to the implication that there would have been anything inappropriate ("true, fair") about the opponents taking no action that could cost them the game. If they act within the rules, I see no problem with inaction here. And (had the original interpretation been correct) I would have had a serious problem ever lining up again with people who deliberately tried to give the game away. Given the eventual revelation of the correct ruling, it was effectively a moot point, but I can't imagine I would have ever wanted to play alongside those players again.

I just want to make sure I am reading this right. If the rule had been interpreted correctly and the girl would only get first base since she couldn't physically get herself around the bases, you would be upset at the opposition for helping her around the bases? You would want the runner stuck at first because the rules permit it?

[rkmsuf]

I just want to make sure I am reading this right. If the rule had been interpreted correctly and the girl would only get first base since she couldn't physically get herself around the bases, you would be upset at the opposition for helping her around the bases? You would want the runner stuck at first because the rules permit it?

yeah hopefully that's a fake view just so he can take the opposite point

[CU Tiger]

No, it was not just about the homerun. Earlier in the thread it was clearly stated that the umps misinterpreted the rule and were going to make the substitute stay at first base.

Im not trying to be devil's advocate or obtuse here, but where do you read this?

The first-base coach said she would be called out if her teammates tried to help her. Or, the umpire said, a pinch runner could be called in, and the homer would count as a single.


Would COUNT as a single in the scoring, not that the runner would have to stay at 1st.


BTW for all thee game winning talk, this happened in the top of the 2nd inning...