Megan Crosby: Not Cool

Megan Crosby is the junior catcher for the Needville High School softball team.

In the Texas Class 4A state championship game last week, she did some dirty shit. Just watch the above video, as Crosby twice—twice!—elbows Huffman players as they cross the plate.

I’m not in the business of destroying high school kids because, well, they’re high school kids. But if you’re the Needville High coach, or the Needville High principal, you have to:

A. Suspend Crosby a couple of days, or at least make her miss a week of next season.

B. Call her parents in and make certain they understand you don’t do this sort of thing.

C. Call Huffman High’s principal, head coach, as well as the two players who were elbowed, an apologize.

But here’s the thing … none of that will happen. Why? First, because Texas is the land of the insane. Second, because Texas is the land of the insane—especially when it comes to sports. Third, because there are certainly a large number of Needville backers who truly believe Crosby did nothing wrong; that she was showing the heart and drive of a champion; that this is how you win; that catcher is a rugged position; that winners win—feelings and pain be damned.

Which, of course, sucks. Because one day Megan Crosby will be a parent. And she’ll applaud as her daughter or son behaves the same exact way.

128 thoughts on “Megan Crosby: Not Cool”

  1. Her parents are defending her on Facebook with a cute little profile photo. Her parents are obviously idiots themselves. Backwards Texas morons raising more morons. They probably raised her to defend the plate regardless even if it means hurting someone. They are all thugs. But right now, the nation pretty much hates this girl – and that is paybacks times 1 billion

    1. Why are you attacking her? What is your stake? This is so simple, in HS softball the offense is required to attempt to avoid significant contact. Attempt to avoid doesn’t mean show complete contempt to the catcher just because they have an illegal positioning. You HAVE to change your running path or speed to AVOID contact. THESE RUNNERS BOTH CHANGED THEIR PATH TOWARD THE CATCHER IN THE LAST 10 FEET OR LESS. just like a saftey lowering his head, you play dirty and sometimes you get slammed, but it is still YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT.

      1. Unfortunately, you are completely incorrect on rules. No play at the plate, step away. It is that simple. And anyone who understands sports knows this. You must play chess

      2. Obstruction is like a balk, no big deal. Malicious contact is like cleating a first baseman, you should be ejected immediately. Anyone who understands sports knows this, you don’t attack someone for bad positioning, and you don’t charge a goalie, you will lose.

      3. This is exactly what we are explaining to you! Cleating a baseman equals ejection but purposely elbowing a runner TO THE POINT THAT SHES ON THE GROUND TWICE shouldn’t? It’s not bad positioning, her position was fine until the runner was next to her, then she shifted her body into the runners way ON PURPOSE. You must be as blind as the umpires judging this game.

      4. what did you want them to do. Stop and ask the catcher if she would get off the plate so the could touch it. Come on, both runners slowed down, both runners are being told by the player(s) behind the plate (up easy) or something to that effect suggesting their is no play at the plate so they do not have to slide. They are the ones that have the right to the entire plate. The catcher does not. Because the ball is no where close to being there. If the runners had wanted to purposely make contact with the catcher they would not have been the ones flying off to the side like that.

      5. The catcher has the right to stand anywhere she wants to and not be run into. Running the bases is not a right, it is a privilege, if you are wrongfully denied this privilege the ump takes corrective action, not the base runner, and the runner certainly doesn’t gain the right to run into the catcher.

        Interference is defined by Rule 2-32 as an act (physical or verbal) by a member of the team at bat that illegally impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder; or when a runner creates malicious contact with any fielder with or without the ball, in or out of the baseline.

        With or without the ball, in or out of the baseline. This means everywhere, all the time.

        And the second girl didn’t go flying to the side, she put so much inertia into the catcher that after the collision she kept going straight. It even kinda looks like the first girl only went sideways because she pushed off with her foot.

      6. No the catcher does not have the right to stand where ever she wants. She had to get out of the way of the runners if their is no play at the plate.

      7. In MLB the catcher should get out of the way, or they may get run over, and are guilty of obstruction.
        This is NOT MLB. This is HS softball.
        In HS softball, the catcher can stand anywhere, with or without the ball, and be protected by rule from being run into. If in HS softball, you run into the catcher for any reason, you are out, and should be ejected. Also, the run you were due to be awarded for obstruction is superseded by the out you earned for interference.
        I’m sorry if the HS softball rules upset you, I didn’t write them, or vote on them, I just read them and applied them.

      8. Your comment is ridiculous. Change speeds? Sure let’s slow down because the object of the game is to out run the ball and get home. You obviously need to do your homework on softball because DEFENSIVE players have a rule to not block the plate or base if there isn’t a play. It’s called OBSTRUCTION. The VICTIMS running across the plate without attempting a slide because the ball was coming in late which means the there was no play. It’s their own damn fault? They elbowed themselves? Megan Crosby displaced bad sportsmanship by taking out TWO players because they were scoring and it pissed her off. Just like a safety lowers their head? Lol football is a CONTACT SPORT. You know wear they wear a full suit of protection. Although I believe softball is a tough sport with contact in it, it’s not on the same contact level as football and in this case the only one wearing a FULL SUIT OF PROTECTION was the catcher. I’ve played softball for 20 years including college for the #2 team in California so yes I know my shit. Megan Crosby was wrong, and you and people like you are worse because you enable it. Bye Felicia!!

      9. Kiki, Ace is such a dumbass who probably never played a day in its life. Classic obstruction, not to be confused with interference, and the umpire should have caught both of these acts and tossed Megan. I love your viewpoint on this.

      10. I just find it ridiculous that this guy is trying to argue HS softball rules with me when I played varsity 4 years and went to college on a full ride scholarship for softball lol. He’s nuts, thanks for the support 🙂

      11. this really show you either related to megan or you just have no clue on rules haven’t change… you cannot block plate… what she did was illegal and agasint the rules

      12. This really shows that you are related to one of the base runners or you just have no clue. You can block the plate, because if you do, the worse thing that will happen is they will get awarded the run anyways, but under no circumstance should the base runners charge into you. What they did is illegal and against they rules. Kylie George is a Cheater.

      13. While we are at it, let’s point out the difference between obstruction and blocking, because they are two distinct rules, like backswing interference and follow through interference are two separate rules.
        You know what else is a separate rule. Malicious contact, look it up.

      14. You really have ZERO idea of what you are talking about.

        Obstruction is not considered a “minor infraction”. Where did you get that stupid term? The University Interscholastic League plays under the rules of the National Federation of High Schools.

        http://www.uiltexas.org/files/

        From the NFHS website:

        “Obstruction is defined by Rule 2-36 as the act of a defensive team member that hinders or impedes the progress of a batter’s attempt to make contact with a pitched ball or that impedes the progress of a runner or batter-runner who is legally running the bases, unless the fielder is in possession of the ball or is making the initial play on a batted ball. The act may be intentional or unintentional, physical or verbal.”

        The NFHS Softball Rules Committee strongly emphasizes that coaches must remind their players about this definition. Players need to be instructed that they cannot hinder or impede any runner when they are not making a play on a ball or have the ball in their possession. Players need to be made aware of where they are on the field in relationship to opposing team members who are running the bases.

        https://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-content/softball-points-of-emphasis-2015/

      15. From the SAME PAGE INTERFERENCE,
        Interference is defined by Rule 2-32 as an act (physical or verbal) by a member of the team at bat that illegally impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder; or when a runner creates malicious contact with any fielder with or without the ball, in or out of the baseline.
        The NFHS Softball Rules Committee strongly emphasizes that coaches remind their players about this definition, and what they need to do. As stated, these acts may be physical or verbal and intentional or unintentional. Batters and runners must be taught to be aware of where the ball is and where the opposing team fielders are in relationship to the ball.

        Notice the words malicious contact, with or without the ball, in or out of the baseline.

        And remember malicious contact always supersedes obstruction.

      16. Your a fucking dumbass. You really think both runners took out the catcher???? What fucking video are you watching??? Idiot

      17. I was watching the video of the stud catcher who takes two cheap shots and still remains focused on the play.

      18. Dude – Ace – You’re really confused here man… Let me help you out.

        INTERFERENCE is when a base runner “impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder” (I’m taking that from your quote of the rules). If the catcher was in the process of making a play, and the runner interfered with that play and prevented it from being made, THAT would be interference.

        When no play at the base is being made, the catcher must not “impede the progress of a runner or batter-runner who is legally running the bases”. That is OBSTRUCTION.

        In other words: Unless a play is being made, that catcher needs to get the F**K out of the way and let the runner score. She clearly stood in the path and obstructed both of the runners intentionally. Do you disagree??

        The only thing that the base runners “Interfered” with was the catcher committing “Obstruction”.

        Just FYI, The intent of the Interference rule is to prevent a base runner from intentionally plowing into an fielder who is waiting to catch a pop-fly, or plow into the 3rd baseman who is about to make the throw to 1st and get the batter out; or something like that. Not to make the base runners run around the catcher. In-fact, if the runner unnecessarily deviates from the baseline they are automatically out – so what are you suggesting the base runners do exactly?

        How about you just suggest the catcher not cheat, and then we can all be hunky-dory here. I pray to god you don’t teach/coach/interact with kids. You don’t need to be passing this kind of attitude on to the next generation.

      19. Yes the catcher may have been obstructing, but the runners commit interference when they run into the catcher. It is necessary to deviate from the running path to avoid commiting interference because, interference supersedes obstruction, therefore the catcher is not charged with obstructing.

        The league called it interference, why don’t you get it?

        In HS softball the runner doesn’t get to contact the catcher regardless of wether the catcher has the ball or is in the baseline.

      20. If I were the base runner – and I knew that I had a right to the plate (because the catcher didn’t have the ball) and I was running full speed at the plate and the catcher stepped in my path – that is her fault…. not the fault of the base runner.

        Where did the league call it interference?

      21. Come on… Seriously??

        That is not even close to what you described: “The league called it interference”. Yeah, right. You made it sound like the league proclaimed the base runners were at fault after-the-fact. In actuality, all they did was say that they could not make any rulings after the game is over. Which is lucky for Megan, because she would likely be found at fault if they could.

        You may as well be arguing “a tree that falls in the woods when no one is around to hear it makes no noise.”

        Either way – the game officials didn’t call it ANYTHING – so they definitely didn’t call it interference, as you are suggesting.

        Why are you reaching so hard to defend this girl? Even if you were able to successfully argue that she didn’t break any rules, on a technicality (which you have not been able to argue successfully, for the record) her actions are still unsportsmanlike and despicable! Why would you want to align yourself with behavior like that?

      22. If you can’t see that the league called it interference from the statement there is no amount of discussion that will correct that.

        The only thing they definitely didn’t call it was obstruction.

        I’m pointing out that obstruction is like goaltending, it is not a problem, take your penalty and play on. But the runners malicious contact interference is about a thousand times worse, it not only supersedes any obstruction that may have occurred, it is a gross misconduct that should result in immediate ejection.

        Why are you trying so hard to attack this girl and defend these base runners? More importantly, why do you feel that violent malicious physical contact interference is the correct response to obstruction?

        I teach my players to avoid this contact, but you think players should feel they have the right to the plate, regardless of the right the catcher has to her space. This is not supported by the rules and is dirty play.

      23. It’s very clear to me (and probably everyone else) that the language the league used was reprimanding the catcher – not the base runners. The article and the league both insinuated that the actions of the catcher were controversial and dangerous. That is blatant.

        I just now understand that we see what happened fundamentally differently. I saw two runners just running the bases as fast as they could. They assumed the catcher would get out of their way (as the rules dictate she should). Instead of allowing them to run the bases, the catcher shifts her weight into the runners and throws an elbow each time. The runners were completely caught off guard (or else why would they have gone flying like that??). If they were maliciously and violently trying to hit the catcher their body form and positioning would have been completely different. This is not only clear from watching the tape, but it is also evidenced by the fact that they were completely ‘clothes-lined’ to the ground and the catcher firmly held her ground. She is the one who got ready for, and initiated, the hit. The runners were just running the bases at top speed and expected the catcher to give up the base line.

        Had they been trying to hit her, the results would have been WAY different. The way they were knocked down is 100% indicative of the fact that the catcher initiated the hit and the runners were not expecting it. I thought that was obvious, but now I see you don’t think so. So you’re suggesting that thee runners were the malicious actors here? Then why did they go flying and the catcher throw an elbow and shift into them at the last second? (instead of shifting away as she should have done). If the runners were trying to hit her, and she were trying to get out of the way, the catcher would have wound up on the ground instead of the runners.

        For the record – I played football, hockey and lacrosse in HS and lacrosse in college – It is really obvious which player is lowering the bow and which one is getting clobbered. I think for further evidence, you just need to look for the common denominator. The catcher was involved in both instances. Those base runners weren’t running over any other field players, were they? If it walks like a duck…

      24. The league didn’t insinuate anything, they said interference. The article is a joke, written to attract, not inform. What is clear to you is not clear to anybody else, so you need to use direct quotes, instead of “the language” or else nobody knows what you are talks about.

        Running the bases “as fast as you can” is dangerous, especially if you do it in a negligent and hazardous way. That is why you are not allowed, by rule, to run without regard to your surroundings.

        For the record, neither of us knows if the runners were trying to run over other fielders, maybe they were and the fielders had to jump out of the way several times before the runners encountered a fielder(I.e. The catcher with the pads on) who chose not to. I have seen lots of players try to lower the bow on someone they thought wasn’t expecting it only to be completely blown up. In football a cornerback will often lower their head to make a harder hit, but it doesn’t make it the receivers fault if the corner gets hurt, because lowering your head is dangerous to the point that they have made it against the rules. Running into a fielder is dangerous, that is why it is against the rules.

        In both plays, if the catcher was making the dirty hard hit you are saying to an unsuspecting base runner, the runners should have been stopped cold, or blasted way out the the right of frame, but both runners leaned into the contact significantly, the second one hit the catcher much harder and she continued in a straight line because she leaned into the contact that much harder.

        The catcher was not trying to get out of they way because she does not have to, she may have been willfully committing obstruction, that is her prerogative. She even got ready for the hit, but if she gets hit by a runner who is going top speed and just expecting her to move out of the way, that is the definition of malicious contact interference.

        As an all star mvp catcher, she takes a brutal hit, but it should earn her team an out. And as for what is indicative, I think that your expression of the belief that the results of a collision is indicative of the actions of the actors in the collision makes you a likely flopper, one who would flail about to indicate a foul commited on you where none exists, hence your allegiance to these flopper runners.

      25. So because the league said the word ‘interference’ that is a determination of the result?? You don’t even know what the question they were respond to to was. Also, thanks for calling me a ‘flopper’. One of the most despicable types of people in the world of sports. For the record I do not believe these runners ‘flopped’. It looks to me like they were genuinely caught off guard as they were trying to run the bases when they were brutally and illegally hit by the catcher.

        So let me get this straight… You have said that if the catcher takes a hit – she earns her team an out (and eliminates what would otherwise be a run by the opposing team). So by your logic, if a runner is about to cross home plate, the catcher should ALWAYS jump into the runner right as they are crossing the plate, right? There is no downside. If you don’t give the runner enough time to get out of the way, you negate a run and you get an out! GENIUS! WHY HAS NO ONE THOUGHT OF THIS BEFORE??? Great coaching there buddy! That really embodies the notion of ‘sportsmanship’!

        I think you should find the answer evident by the fact that EVERYONE in the media, the league and in all of these comment sections feels that the catcher is the one at fault. You, all alone and by your single interpretation of the rules, feel like she was right. What does that say to you?

      26. You really have gone loco, where to begin.
        The media mostly posed this as a question, and not one member of the media has cited any rules. The only people I have found who do cite the rules, do so from the wrong book, this is not MLB OR ASA.
        Then there is you, who went from, she didn’t get out of the way, to, the catcher should jump into the runner. Choose a lane already…
        The league issued a statement. It is not a response to a specific question, unless the question is “can we get a statement?”
        Obstruction is against the rules and repeat offenses can lead to an ejection, so obviously you shouldn’t attempt to draw an interference call, unless you know the dirty runners will plow into you, then it is an all star move. Obstruction is like goaltending, you look like an ass doing it, but sometimes it happens. If goaltending Lebrun James caused him to earn a double technical or a flagrant 2, which is what the interference with malicious contact is equivalent to, then every team would try it.
        Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that 99.9% of runners run fast and safe, but these two ran fast and reckless?
        And why do you think they run on the base line/path? Runners almost always run well outside the base path, creating what is referred to as the runners lane.
        You do know that interference supercedes obstruction? Or did you miss that part too?

      27. I THINK that you just said breaking the rules is an “all star move”. Yup – you did. That really shows what kind of character you have. Good luck in life with that kind of attitude, Ace.

        Those runners took the same course and speed that 99.9% of runners take – without getting decked by the catcher. The catcher intentionally stood in their way and hit them as they were trying to touch home plate. That is not a fair way to play the game and it is against the rules, no matter how you try to justify it to yourself.

        Oh wait – you’re right and everyone ELSE is wrong. I get it now…

        Since you are all uptight about citing the rule book – please cite the rule to prove your claim “that interference supersedes obstruction”.

      28. Page 65 2010 NFHS Softball Rules Rule 8-6 SECTION 6 THE RUNNER IS OUT
        A runner is out when:
        ART. 14 . . . She remains on her feet and maliciously crashes into a defensive player. Malicious contact supersedes obstruction.
        PENALTY: (Arts. 10 through 14) The ball is dead and the runner is out. Each other runner must return to the last base touched at the time of the interfer- ence. When a runner is called out for interference, the batter-runner is award- ed first base and credited with a fielder’s choice. If this interference, in the judgment of the umpire, is an obvious attempt to prevent a double play and occurs before the runner is put out, the immediate succeeding runner shall also be called out. If interference occurs by the runner on a foul fly ball, the runner is out and the ball is dead. A foul ball is called in this situation and the batter remains at bat unless it was a bunt attempt with two strikes on the bat- ter (F.P) or it was the third strike (S.P); the batter is also out in these cases. (Art. 14) The runner is also ejected.

      29. You can quote the rule book all you want. I see what you’re saying but I don’t view what the runners did as malicious contact. You have failed to convince me, or anyone else. I’m out.

      30. Rule 8-4 2010 NFHS Softball Rules Page 62
        PENALTY: (Art. 3b) When any obstruction occurs (including a rundown), the umpire will signal a delayed dead ball. The ball will remain live.
        a. If the obstructed runner is put out prior to reaching the base that would
        have been reached had there not been obstruction, a dead ball is called and the obstructed runner and each other runner affected by the obstruc- tion will be awarded the base or bases which would have been reached, in the umpire’s judgment, had there not been obstruction. An obstructed runner may not be called out between the two bases where she was obstructed.
        EXCEPTIONS:

        1. When an obstructed runner, after the obstruction, safely obtains or returns to the base she would have been awarded, in the umpire’s judgment, had there been no obstruction and there is a subsequent play on a different runner, the obstructed runner is no longer protected between the bases where she was obstructed and may be put out.
        2. When properly appealed for missing a base or leaving a base before a fly ball was first touched while advancing. If obstruction occurred while a runner was returning to touch the base, she is protected.
        3. When committing an act of interference.

      31. Every all star in every sport knows there are some rules that are there for the breaking. Do you really expect anyone to believe that you have never broken a rule in a game? I know all star basketball players make all star fouls every game, I know all star corner backs take PI calls to save touch downs, I know all star soccer players take freaking yellow cards to make defensive stops, none of these are considered dirty, and neither is standing in the runners way. What is dirty, is running into a stationary player because you think you have some right to that space that is already being occupied.

        Have you googled “interference supersedes obstruction” it’s pretty clear but you apparently needed a little help with that.

      32. Ace – I’ve become resigned to the fact that you believe the rules don’t apply to you, so arguing is pointless. I would agree with your point about taking a penalty to prevent a score – however that is not the case in this instance. The catcher obstructing home plate does not prevent the base-runner from scoring – it is an automatic score. The only reason she would be doing this is to take a cheap-shot the runner. What you’re describing is trading points on your opponent’s scoreboard for a penalty. This is accepting the fact that they are going to score and trying to take a cheap-shot.

        Either way – you think the base-runners had malicious intent, I think the catcher had malicious intent. We see it differently. I see it the way everyone else does – and you see it the way no one else does. That’s ok with me, and i presume you’re used to it at this point.

        The motivations of the catcher are obvious. She is upset that her team is blowing their lead in the playoffs, so she decides to deck a few girls who are much smaller than she is; and who can’t stop/change direction easily because they are running full speed towards home. It’s hardly an ‘all-star move’ designed to lessen the opposition’s chance to score. It’s more along the lines of taking candy from a baby. Easy and unethical.

        I think you should probably watch the video again though, and see who initiates the contact. On the second one, the catcher even makes like she is going to get out of the way at the last second (which is what I’m sure the runners were expecting, since its part of the rules and all) and then shifts her momentum back at the runner and throws an elbow. The determination here is as easy as that. Just because there is contact doesn’t mean it’s ‘malicious’ and the runner’s fault. Enjoy your stolen lollipop. Make sure to wipe the baby slobber off before you take a lick. Or don’t.

      33. I’m not saying the runners had malicious intent, the rule is called malicious contact, I believe the league uses the word malicious because of the unnecessary nature of the contact, I.e. That it is avoidable by the runners if they show even the slightest amount of due diligence in their base running, instead of total negligence.
        Clearly it is not an automatic score, the runner has to avoid making rudimentary base running mistakes to score. Running into a fielder is one of those mistakes, that only happens if the defender puts them self in that position. The catcher did a great job taking a stationary position and allowed the runner to make a mistake that by all accounts of the rules should have cost them the opportunity to score a run, and instead been an automatic out for malicious contact interference.
        I don’t see how a stationary, or damn near stationary catcher initiates contact, you see the catcher sway between a couple of frames and pretend like she broke 1 mph, she didn’t.
        Why do you feel that she chose to deck smaller girls, she isn’t big, kinda scrawny looking compared to the girls she was run into by, especially the really chunky second one, look like they are linebackers.
        The fact that a runner can’t change speed or direction easily is not an excuse for not even trying to avoid a collision, both runners leaned into the collision, both runners saw it coming the whole way, neither runner even thought about a slide or slowing up, they ran hard like the play was right there, why should the catcher be the only player responsible for playing like the ball was coming any second? If there was no play, the actions of the runners are even less justified. The fact that the runners did nothing to avoid this collision makes it malicious and their fault, just so we are clear in advance, you don’t have to have malicious intent to have malicious action, just like you probably didn’t have retarded intent, but you made a retarded response.

      34. Sophomore Kylie George, who was on deck and behind home plate, called to Janak to stay up and not slide. George thought the fall was odd, but even she didn’t see the elbow.
        Why would Kylie say that?
        The rule says a runner is out of they stay on their feet to hit the catcher, A runner is out when:
        ART. 14 . . . She remains on her feet and maliciously crashes into a defensive player. Malicious contact supersedes obstruction.
        Oh yeah, at the time Kylie was losing, and this was their only chance to take a cheap shot at the catcher, I bet it was this call to the runner, clearly heard by the catcher, that alerted Megan to the incoming cheap shot in the first place.

        This is were the real fans of cheating start with, “I would have my biggest player crash into her when I get the chance”…

        But wait? That is exactly what they did, none other than Kylie herself comes in right behind another runner who had no problem(seriously not even a hint of a problem), and takes her whole weight and throws herself into the catcher. But this is were Megan shows why she’s going to college for sports and Kylie is crying on these pages with floppers like you, cause Megan stood there and knowing full well that a cheater is coming for her, played her position flawlessly, stud.

        Does anyone wonder why we get to see these plays specifically? Is it because Kylie’s family is recording her attempts at cheating? I don’t know, but it is interesting to consider what is and is not being recorded. It defiantly seems like it’s a Hargrove supporter who knows something dirty is coming.

      35. Wow – you’re in another world my man. I’ll bet the Illuminati was there too. Waiting for that dirty base running.

        It’s quite easy to read what is going on here. But since you obviously never played sports, let me try to help you understand. You’re charging towards home plate – and you’re told there is no play at the plate so you don’t slide, knowing that without a play, the catcher will get out of the way. You’re down in a playoff game so all you’re focusing on is the plate and making sure you touch it (wouldn’t want to miss the plate and give the defense time to get the ball home). You’re getting closer and closer, then, at the last second you realize the catcher DIDN’T get out of the way like she was supposed to, and it’s too late to stop. She throws a cheap-shot elbow into your upper body, knocking you to the ground. Expecting another player to follow the rules is not against the rules. Think of it this way: you’re approaching an intersection in your car and you have the green light so you proceed through – however a driver in the intersecting road runs their red light and you wind up T-boning them. Sure – it would have been safer for you to stop and check both directions before you proceeded through the intersection, but you had the light! Which person is at fault in that instance?

        You are inferring that anytime a runner comes into contact with a fielders it is “malicious contact”. I don’t think this is the case. It has to be a judgement call by the umpire and in both of these instances it looks to me like the runners had the green light and were expecting the catcher to get out of the way – but instead she decked an unsuspecting runner because she was bigger and in pads and they weren’t expecting it. That is a cheap-shot if I’ve ever seen one.

        Now you can go and mull this over with all of your friends and come back to me with your response. It shouldn’t take long because I doubt someone with an attitude or disposition like yours has a lot of friends. Or maybe the few of you sit around and yell slurs at passers by? What other slurs do you keep in your repertoire? Classy my man! Anyway – keep following girls softball with such intensity – its not creepy at all…

      36. So this is more like if you come to an intersection, at full speed, and see a car stopped in your lane, and look up at the green light and think ‘they will move before I get there’ and then you drive into a stalled vehicle. Yes, as the moving vehicle hitting the stopped vehicle this will always be your fault.
        You said she was bigger than the runners, again, that is just funny.

        From nfhs-
        The majority of intentional collisions occur at home plate where the catcher is blocking the plate anticipating a play. Runners should be instructed to slide or attempt to avoid making contact with any defensive player. Malicious contact is penalized whether committed by an offensive or defensive player. So that focus can be given to the parameters surrounding malicious contact, the following suggestions are offered: contact or a collision is considered to be malicious if (1) the contact is the result of intentional excessive force, (2) the contact occurred above the waist of the receiving player, and/or (3) there was intent to injure. It should not be misconstrued that the absence of these three conditions would automatically remove the presence of something malicious, but these suggestions certainly provide a starting point for consideration.
        I’m not saying there was (3)intent to injure, but (1)&(2) definitely.
        And as for, ‘it’s too late to stop’ they didn’t even try to slow down or change direction, and that is where I, and most people, draw the line between incidental and malicious. If you try to avoid it, it is incidental, all other contact is malicious.
        Now for those slurs you asked for…
        You are stupid, not just regular stupid, but that special kind of stupid that makes you feel like everyone’s nodding in agreement when you are talking in a room by yourself.
        You are the kind of stupid that takes two helmets protect.
        You are the kind of stupid that makes other stupid people try to come up with different levels of stupid just to avoid being associated with your stupid ass.
        You are the kind of stupid that gets a shirt with an arrow pointing up and then puts it on inside out.
        You are the kind of stupid that keeps changing hair styles so you feel like you have a friend in the mirror.
        You are the kind of stupid that trolls the internet looking for an argument that took place a month ago in hopes that you can just jump in on the winning side and get a whole crowd of support, how’s that working for out for you? Getting a lot of love from the crickets?

      37. Thanks for not using an offensive slur when you insult me. I can tell you’re really making an effort to improve yourself and I appreciate that. It means a lot to me. It really does.

        After I read your definition of malicious contact I feel that my (and everyone else with two eyes and a brain) interpretation is correct. I would say that the catcher committed (1), (2) AND (3)… and the runners are just running home. I don’t agree with your stalled vehicle analogy. That would be analogous to a situation where the catcher was injured and laying in the base line and the runner stepped on her, or something like that. Not this situation.

        The catcher does appear, to me, to be much larger than the runners she hit – but if you can’t see that she is the one who did the ‘hitting’, how can I expect you to see something as complicated as size.

        As for why I disputed your assessment of the situation, it is because I was, and remain, appalled by the unsportsmanlike conduct I saw and I felt compelled to speak out against it (and add my voice to the crowd denouncing the catcher – because every vote counts, right?). As to why I was a month late in seeing it? As a grown man without children I don’t follow girls HS sports and I commented on the article as soon as it came to my attention.

        Take care Ace. I wish you all the best in life and I sincerely hope you achieve success in your efforts to become a better person. I’m sure it will result in happiness.

      38. Stupid has been a slur much longer than retarded. I used retarded for its literal meaning, not as a slur. But as slurs go stupid>retarded, but I can see how with your mentality, how if everyone calls you stupid it’s okay, you are clearly stupid or why would everyone say it. But if only your doctor calls you mentally retarded, you’d tell him “everyone else with two eyes and a brain can tell that I’m stupid, not retarded!”
        Stall just means stopped, not broken or disabled. My analogy is still the same, stopped vehicle in front of you, even if they shouldn’t be there, by fact that they are stopped, if you can see them and still hit them it is always your fault, same as HS softball, just because the catcher is in the base path without the ball doesn’t mean she is a target, she is still protected against interference of any kind.
        I too was appalled, by both the unsportsmanlike play of the runners and the embarrassing media coverage. I too felt compelled to speak out against it, and commented on the articles directly to their authors for not doing any actual journalism and putting together click bait.
        But you didn’t comment on the article, instead you replied to my comments, not the same.
        Since you don’t follow girls sports, you are a terrible judge of size. Megan is thin, really thin. The base runners who chose to hit her are both wide and bulky, the only little girl running the bases is the one who didn’t hit the catcher.
        Thank you! People think I’m a bad guy when I try to explain to retarded people that I meet in real life things that they are never going to understand. But whenever I feel I have the skill to teach a stupid ass the rules, I can always count on you to say “nuh uh, nuh uh”. I’m surprised you haven’t just started replying with “s-not, s-not, s-not!”

      39. literal meaning of retarded: Delayed; delayed in development, hindered; impeded. [from 17th c.]. (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/retarded) So my comment was delayed, impeded or hindered? Interesting… My internet speed seems to be just fine.

        I don’t quite follow your next comments but overall I’m fine if you want to call me stupid. That is your problem. It is, however, offensive in polite society to say something derogatory about someone or something by calling it “retarded”. It doesn’t actually offend me but I figured it was indicative of what kind of a person you were. That is why I wanted to point it out. What kind of colorful words do you use to describe people based solely on their race or religion? I’ll bet you can rattle off some real humdingers! (http://noahsdad.com/spread-the-word-to-end-the-word/)

        I still don’t agree with your motor vehicle analogy. (https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=stall%20definition ) A “stalled” motor vehicle is, by definition, not running, i.e. disabled. The catcher in this analogy should not be traveling in the same lane as the hypothetical runner. The catcher should really be stopped at the red light on the intersecting road.

        I would liken the catcher’s actions more to the “Swoop and Squat” or the “Panic Stop” described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staged_crash

        As per the size – I know what I see when I’m looking at it. Forgive me for not having all of their height and weight and dimensions memorized (as you probably do – since you seemingly follow girl’s sports…), but it is clear to me that she is significantly taller than both girls and significantly bigger than the second girl she hit. At least equal in size but most likely larger than the first girl too.

        Either way – I’m done with this so you will not see me post here again. I replied directly to your comment because your attitude about sportsmanship was upsetting. I will concede that you are correct in that the runners should try to avoid hitting the defenders – however it is not always possible to anticipate what the fielders will do and it appears to me that they were expecting the catcher to get out of their way (which is a reasonable expectation because the rules dictate she should) and accidentally ran into her when she did’t (the first time) and faked out the runner (the second time). I would not call it malicious contact – and I believe the catcher was attempting to take a cheap shot and possibly draw a foul – which it sounds like you think is the correct course of action, and I think is despicable and unsportsmanlike.

        Good day – Ace.

      40. dictionary.reference.com/browse/retarded
        characterized by a slowness or limitation in intellectual understanding and awareness, emotional development, academic progress, etc.

        You are the last person who should be giving advice on anything, you are too stupid to tell your ass from a hat. You couldn’t quite follow an exhale with an inhale, much less make a cohesive argument to explain why you think all your stupid nonsense.

        http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/stall
        The word stall implies stopping something that will start again — a horse will leave the stall eventually and start moving, a stalled car can be restarted.

        It is not a reasonable expectation that a player will move, that is the most reckless line of BS to justify malicious contact. “I wouldn’t have ran into her if she would just move” seriously, that’s pretty retarded(see definition provided).

        I believe the catcher was attempting to draw a foul, that is an all star move, just ask any nhl nba nfl mls all star, not MLB, those guys think it’s an all star move to deliver a properly justified ‘foul’.

        She basically took a charging penalty while standing under the hoop, except the charging players went way outside normal play, and should have gotten flagrant 2 style ejections.

        Now go troll somebody else, you have been POwned here.

      41. Both runners got flattened by an all star caliber stud of a catcher while acting reckless and negligent as determined by the rules of their sport.

      42. Is your real name Ace? You come off more like a Deuce. Or maybe I should douche. Ok, name calling is uncalled for and I apologize. Plain and simple, it was unnecessary contact with intent to injure. Not cool.

      43. What world do you live in? If a runner is crossing the plate with no play at the plate, the catcher needs to step forward and allow the player the base path. Your part of the problem with your idiotic viewpoint.

      44. I, I agree. I happened to be in umpire for USA Fastpitch and a previous Umpire for the MLB. Explain more!

      45. In hs softball, there is no protection for a runner that would allow them to blindly run to the plate. Just because there is no ball, doesn’t mean this is not interference. Interference supersedes obstruction. Why do you feel the catcher NEEDS to step forward as oppose to the catcher SHOULD step forward? Why do you feel that failing to move is anything more than a simple goaltending? How can you justify the runners willful neglect of the malicious contact interference rules?
        Please cite some rules.

      46. Have you played catcher? So the runner should tip toe around home plate with no play at the plate? And the elbow checking the runner as they cross the plate. Instant ejection. One of the problems is the Umpire wasn’t watching the runners crossing the plate and didn’t see the play so we could not properly judge the action. I wish you the best but obviously you have some bias in this situation.

      47. The runner should not run into the catcher, ever. There is no rule that justifies running into the catcher. There is a rule that says running into the catcher, regardless of any obstruction, should result in an ejection.

        Rules, please follow them instead of injecting your own biased opinions on how you want the game played.

      48. MLB governs all levels single-A AA and AAA baseball. I don’t need to justify myself to your dumbass anyways. Get a fucking clue not so ace.

      49. before you speak you do know the catcher cannot stand there and block plate without ball and without ball coming to her secondly…. runner is to avoid interfrence or slide… the catcher went back and elbow the runner therefore the catcher is illegal action and should of been ejected.

  2. I saw this video yesterday. I think the umpire saw both elbows and did nothing. Couldn’t believe it. Maybe the Texas allusion has merit, but that would be very sad if true.

  3. Considering the way sport is supposed to police itself I’m wondering why there’s no video of a softball getting buried in her butt during her next at bat.

    (no, that’s not ok either)

    1. To follow up on this, for the sake of a couple of cheap shots that meant nothing to the game being played that stupid girl has put a big fat target on herself for the rest of her playing career. Her crap is a one time trick, now that the word is out she’s going to get it done to her before she can do to others.

  4. So incredibly sad. It’s amazing that no one at the game reacted either time. I heard a voice saying “she did it again” but that was about it. Where’s the real time protests?

  5. In HS softball the offense is required to attempt to avoid significant contact, often through the use of a slide. Even in college this is dirty base running.

      1. One account, same handle, and comments to two boards. Did a search on your account and have seen the nonsense you posted. Good luck, as you are obviously unteachable.

      2. damn you are texas triggered, your posts are so full of it, don’t you have a steer to mate with to calm your ass down?

      1. The slide is only the most common way of avoiding a collision, not required. Obstruction is a minor infraction, easily remedied as long as you remain a legal base runner. I’m going to assume that you also have a copy of the rules, look up malicious contact.

      2. You really have ZERO idea of what you are talking about.

        Obstruction is not considered a “minor infraction”. Where did you get that stupid term? The University Interscholastic League plays under the rules of the National Federation of High Schools.

        http://www.uiltexas.org/files/athletics/manuals/Softball_Manual15.pdf

        From the NFHS website:

        “Obstruction is defined by Rule 2-36 as the act of a defensive team member that hinders or impedes the progress of a batter’s attempt to make contact with a pitched ball or that impedes the progress of a runner or batter-runner who is legally running the bases, unless the fielder is in possession of the ball or is making the initial play on a batted ball. The act may be intentional or unintentional, physical or verbal.”

        The NFHS Softball Rules Committee strongly emphasizes that coaches must remind their players about this definition. Players need to be instructed that they cannot hinder or impede any runner when they are not making a play on a ball or have the ball in their possession. Players need to be made aware of where they are on the field in relationship to opposing team members who are running the bases.

        https://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-content/softball-points-of-emphasis-2015/

  6. in HS softball the offense is required to attempt to avoid significant contact. Attempt to avoid doesn’t mean show complete contempt to the catcher just because they have an illegal positioning. You HAVE to change your running path or speed to AVOID contact. THESE RUNNERS BOTH CHANGED THEIR PATH TOWARD THE CATCHER IN THE LAST 10 FEET OR LESS. just like a saftey lowering his head, you play dirty and sometimes you get slammed, but it is still YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT.

    1. You’re an idiot.

      Hope she losses her scholarship. And I am guessing that once the state sees this she will be missing a lot of next year too.

      1. You mean a defensive player, and yes those are two rules of the game. Now look up the corrective action, nowhere does it say ‘and the penalty is the runner is allowed to run into you.’

        Now please, look up malicious contact, and the corrective action. Notice how it DOES NOT say ‘avoid contact unless you think the player is in the wrong the feel free to run into them.’

      2. Crosby was basically on the plate of course the runners ran towards her so they could touch the plate! You can’t tell me you did not see her turn her body and elbow those poor girls. She’s in the wrong as well as she should be but you’re just making yourself look stupid.

    2. They did try to avoid the contact but they still have to touch the plate. And from where the catcher was standing there was no way to do that. The catcher was not supposed to be their. She is not in the play. The ball is not on it’s way she is supposed to get out of the way. You must be related to or know the catcher personally to so pushy on the offensive rules but not the defense rules. The catcher should have gotten out of the way. Period.

      1. If the catcher is in the way you do not have to touch the plate, you shouldn’t risk injury to anyone to try and touch the plate, and the umpire should award you the run, as long as you don’t commit interference.

        If you do commit interference, I.e. Run into the catcher, then interference supersedes obstruction and you should be out, no runs scored, and ejected for malicious contact.

        I don’t know any of these people personally and am more than happy to acknowledge the defensive violations, but the rules state quite clearly that obstruction means you were unable to reach the plate, and if you try to go through the obstruction and create interference; malicious contact, then interference supersedes obstruction.

      2. Having played softball for 35 years I can say you are out of your mind. The runner always has to touch the plate. The umpire is never going to give you the run just because the catcher was in the way. You have to touch the plate. The runner has a right to the baseline and to the plate. If the catcher does not have a play at the play he/she does not have a right to be in the base path or blocking the plate.

      3. How many years have you played high school girls softball?

        I would not allow or play with an umpire who isn’t going to enforce the obstruction rules. These rules state the exact opposite of what you are saying. The umpire is ALWAYS going to give you the run IF the catcher IS in the way, provided you aren’t also committing interference, defined as running into a player in or out of the baseline, with or without the ball.

        In HS softball, the defense can stand anywhere, with or without the ball, and if you run into them it is interference, and any obstruction is superseded.

        Obstruction is like goaltending, the ball doesn’t have to go through the basket to get points, and you can’t respond to someone goaltending by charging into them.

  7. Ace. nice Ace. So what your trying to say is the girls should have run around the plate then run back to touch it. They were running back to get to base line. Worst thing you can do is stick up for this kind of action. No wonder America as is going in wrong direction with this kind of thinking. Watched this a bunch of times and you have to be ignorant to see it anyway other then dirty. As far as the state of Texas goes I usually side with their way of thinking and I would hope most of Texans would not side on this girls actions. Coming from Iowan.

  8. I’ll be the first to admit that my State has done some insane things lately, and Texans are crazy about sports. I grew up in a small town where football was, and still is a religion. But I can honestly say that, in victory or defeat, sportsmanship was more important than anything else. Don’t you dare judge all of the wonderful young men and women in Texas high school athletics by the actions of one aberration.

    1. i take tx over fl anyday the problem is tx think its bigger and better than anyone else… i challange that nonsense easily… the fact teh school barley will do anything the fact the umpire ingored or wasn’t paying attetion when he should of all should be displained but writer is right

  9. the high school office knows about this now..playing on a high school team means following the rules. officials must enforce the rules. the same logic liberals use against police, thinking they can walk up to police when they are addressing one issue. that is detaining a suspect. I would ban her for life and her possible college sam houston state needs to revoke her scholarship.

    1. your a fool on libreals there times when comes over step there grounds and you can’t just randomly accpet ever single type of behaivor in a police force there humans there not innoncet

  10. Char…not sure where you are from, but I am sure it is a hell of lot worse than Texas. Don’t stereo type us or our state.

  11. There are going to be players that will deliberately mow her down, her time will come then her parents wont think its so cool

  12. Don’t blame all of Texas. The majority of Texans who know anything about softball (not a lot) know Crosby was wrong and condemn her.

    1. What about the base runners? The ones who clearly violated the malicious contact rule? And then pretended like they had some excuse to yell at her during the play? The runners commit interference twice each, and the catcher stayed in the play through it all. Freakin’ stud catcher.

      1. Still at this? Base runners did nothing wrong. Megan Crosby and her vicious elbow are at fault, no matter how you try to recreate reality.

      2. The rules say the base runners are at fault, in a recreative reality. But you can keep living in your authoritarian fantasy and judge people by whatever rules you want, just remember it’s only your fantasy.

      3. The rules *absolutely* do NOT say that. You are misreading them. The rules protect the fielders from being impeded or hindered by the runners when they are in the act of making a play. The catcher was not making a play so she should not have been obstructing the runner’s clear path to home plate.

      4. Please paste a whole rule that comes from HS softball that says the catcher has to be making a play to be interfered with.

  13. don’t follow h.s. softball so i’m not familiar with the rules. played h.s. sports though. so – 1) throwing an elbow is malicious. 2) i hope all the bad karma in the world wreaks havoc with this catcher. she’s nothin’ but dirty. always will be. i can smell it.

    1. She was assaulted by two rouge base runners and took it like a grade A class act. If you smell something, perhaps you should look around and find it instead of blaming the article you are reading.

      1. i have no idea what you’re going on about. “blaming the article”? no – i’m blaming the catcher. duh. did YOU read the story, ace? what she did was malicious – or the school wouldn’t have disciplined her. dirty player. sniff, sniff….

      2. Um, she wasn’t disciplined by the school, the team, or the league. She was disciplined by the school district superintendent, but he only has the authority to give her a harsh talking to.

        The fact that the Hargrove team hasn’t even asked the league to look into a possible punishment is a sign that they were more at fault than the catcher.

      3. How exactly were the base runners rogue? Could you shed some light on that please? It looks to me like they were running from 3rd base to home plate (which is perfectly allowable…). A “rogue” base runner would be someone from the batting team out in the outfield or something.

      4. Funny how a catcher could lean and stand like a rock at the same time, most people who are leaning over would then get knocked down but apparently you feel she has super powers.

    2. the best adivce is to ingore Ace as he has no clue what he speaks off. what she did is illegal and wrong in the rules high school youth level

  14. I don’t have a dog in this hunt but I do have a 13 year old that plays softball. I have also played and been around sports my whole life that that is pure chicken **it. Honestly, I would be hard pressed not to come out of the stands myself if that cow had flattened my daughter. Megan should probably stay out of the basepaths next year because there will be allot of girls rounding third with knee caps on their minds. Oh yeah, when you get to college and the other girls are just as big as you, you might get reminded of your not so glorious days at Needham.

    1. If i ever ever saw that RF as an umpire i would eject asap. I had a player in babe ruth baseball lean into pitch to try to get first. didn’t happen on my watch the ball is dead and 1 and whatever the count was not awrded first. Guess what the other coach said? “Thank you”

  15. Agreed….NOT cool!!! Shame on you Megan!!! Apparently you
    weren’t paying attention to the part about practicing good
    sportsmanship. You will be remembered for these moves…and just to let
    you know, that’s not a good thing. I am curious to know, at what age was she given the okay to “play” ball this way. And WHO gave her this okay???

  16. Sophomore Kylie George, who was on deck and behind home plate, called
    to Janak to stay up and not slide. George thought the fall was odd, but
    even she didn’t see the elbow.
    Why would Kylie say that?
    The rule says a runner is out of they stay on their feet to hit the catcher, A runner is out when:
    ART. 14 . . . She remains on her feet and maliciously crashes into a defensive player. Malicious contact supersedes obstruction.
    Oh
    yeah, at the time Kylie was losing, and this was their only chance to
    take a cheap shot at the catcher, I bet it was this call to the runner,
    clearly heard by the catcher, that alerted Megan to the incoming cheap
    shot in the first place.

    This is were the real fans of cheating start with, “I would have my biggest player crash into her when I get the chance”…

    But
    wait? That is exactly what they did, none other than Kylie herself
    comes in right behind another runner who had no problem(seriously not
    even a hint of a problem), and takes her whole weight and throws herself
    into the catcher. But this is were Megan shows why she’s going to
    college for sports and Kylie is crying on these pages with floppers like
    you, cause Megan stood there and knowing full well that a cheater is
    coming for her, played her position flawlessly, stud.

    Does anyone
    wonder why we get to see these plays specifically? Is it because Kylie’s
    family is recording her attempts at cheating? I don’t know, but it is
    interesting to consider what is and is not being recorded. It defiantly
    seems like it’s a Hargrove supporter who knows something dirty is
    coming.

Leave a Reply