All I hear is a lot of complaining and no solutions.

I mean, it's not because of the rule even if it's stupid. The managers just tend to be babies

@@TurnedToast no manager is ok with getting warned when his team did nothing wrong. They'll just wait until Judge is back and throw at him. Fair is fair.

@@brandondillman5841 I think we can expect managers to understand the basic rules of their job. If they can't, that's on them

@@TurnedToast hard to know the rules when there's absolutely no consistency with the enforcement of the rules. It's all good though. Players and coaches don't forget stuff like this. Judge is gonna get a Felix Bautista 103 mph fastball in the ribs next time they play.

Was the camera on the umpire the entire time?

Technically there does not need to be a warning before an ejection. Hyde should know better.

Why the world are you going on and on and on about this? Just because you did not see Hyde being warned does not mean that he wasn't. As to the call being subjective, yes, that's right. All opinion calls are subjective. But, there are some circumstances where the umpire can be pretty sure the beaning was intentional. For example, someone hits a home run, and the next at bat, he is beaned. Or someone is beaned, and following half of the inning, the opposition gets beaned. I have seen many times the pitcher being tossed in similar circumstances. As to Peralta intentionally hitting someone? He was wild throughout his outing. He almost hit an earlier batter, and wildly missed on many pitches. And, for 2023, his walk ratio was 5 per 9 innings. Much higher than his average. To sum it up...just let it go. The video was very well done. No explanation needed

this is what happens when you make up your own language for rules...

Yep, makes sense. The crew got together, forgot they had already issued warnings, and decided to issue then again 🤣😆🤣😆 Also a pitcher isn't ejected just because a batter gets hit by a pitch after warnings are issued. It still has to be intentional.

Wouldnt that be arguing a warning? I mean, if you're arguing that the pitcher shouldve bern tossed, then you're saying that no warning shouldve been issued, which means you're arguing warnings,

​@@kinkaid7477No it would be arguing not ejecting AFTER THE WARNING.

Arguing the warning given to the teams,

Sounds like the narrator is a Yankee fan and is bitter their team got obliterated.

So you think a big league manager needs "clarification" about what was going on? I mean he's probably never seen warnings issued after a batter was hit by a pitch so he just didn't understand what was going on 🤣😆🤣😆

There are a ton of ways, like if someone pimped a home run the AB before, or if they’re getting shelled like in this game, another way is if there was something that happened earlier in the game, like one of their batters getting hit or a collision on the bases. There are plenty of ways.

@@xcc9162 Pure conjecture and speculation...so, EVERY batter plunked after EVERY admired homerun was a deliberate plunking? No...sometimes the ball gets away from the pitcher. It happens. And sometimes, the ball gets away from them with no intent immediately following an admired home run. Again, short of the pitcher announcing his intent, we cannot read their minds. We do not know specifically what their intent was...

@@1969EType I never said that a pitcher will always beam a batter who pimped a homer, it all depends on the guys involved and the scenario. Maybe we just see things differently, I’ve played for 11 years at different levels and have seen all manner of HBP, plenty intentional and plenty not. At the end of day it’s subjective anyways as it’s the umps opinion that matters.

@@xcc9162 I simply wanted to allow for the possibility of a coincidence of an admired home run and the following batter getting plunked simply being the pitcher lost control of the baseball. If we can allow that that situation could occur, than I submit absent a pitcher announcing his intention to plunk that batter? Nobody, most importantly the umpires, can definitively know what the pitcher’s intent was. And since they typically cannot know the pitcher’s intent? How then can they know they should be warning or ejecting them? It’s really just game management because they don’t want things escalating if they don’t warn or eject following a plunking of a batter after his teammate admired a home run. A non-warning or non-ejection there means after the inning is over, the pitcher’s teammate is getting the return plunk and we have a brawl, etc. Like with so much in MLB, they could end this tomorrow. Look at the NHL…catch a guy with a high stick and draw blood? 4 minute, double-minor. No reading of intent. Players have to be responsible for their sticks. MLB should do the the same thing. Anyone gets plunked and the pitcher is ejected immediately. But, MLB won’t do that because it’s part of the entertainment…don’t ever forget it’s not a sport.

The video literally explains the rule. When warning, BOTH SIDES, must be warned.

You have to warn both sides because that is what the rule says as illustrated in the video. The reason that rule is written that way is to try and proactively prevent a retaliation plunking later in the game.

The rule is bullshit. And if it takes Brandon Hyde getting thrown out after the game is basically done - I'll sign that check every damned time.

That English teacher done be from Baltimore.

@@teebob21 Baltimore IS "The City that Reads."

Managers should just say nothing and be happy about it, right? Pitcher throws at head (but misses) and then hits someone in a blowout.. yeah, accidental. Somehow it always is with the Yankees.

@@brianmullaney6237 what a moronic comment. Just be happy your dudes are getting thrown at? You've clearly never played ball and it shows.

Sure you *can* but if they don't want to there's not much recourse other than ejecting them (and then the manager most likely for arguing it).

@@LindsayImber1 But it's worth a try, I think.

This is the right take. While I understand that baseball has a rule book so much of the game is based on personal judgement (otherwise we would have automated balls and strikes by now). And so long as that’s a part of the game, there will always be some give to certain calls. I agree that it might be unfair to toss a pitcher for being bad, but at what point does being bad become an actual safety issue? Yes a manager “should be ejected” if they “argue after being warned,” but if there’s any confusion what good does it do? And in a 14-0 game how does that tame emotions? I get matching the drama of Palmer and Brown with a strong “it’s by the books” take, but it also feels so mechanical in a sport where while we’re trying to make it more mechanical it still relies on just behaving like a person. And in this case, just tell Hyde it’s in the rules and move on. Sometimes I hate baseball haha.

Oh, I'm sure he was talking the entire time from the dugout, coming out of the dugout, when he got tossed. I'm sure he was warned as well to stop doing such.

"It’s a judgement call, am I not allowed to understand what judgement you used to make that call?" No, you're not entitled to that information. The fact that you think you (or players, or managers) are IS the source of the problem.

@@teebob21 Incorrect. There are plenty of examples of managers and umpires disagreeing and talking it out, with the manager returning to the dugout, when the rule book says that the manager could technically be removed for doing so. It's perfectly reasonable for a manager to make a case, as long as they are civil.

@@1georgekitchen And almost none of those examples occur when a manager leaves his position to argue balls and strikes, or following warnings to both benches, as in this ejection.

I am going to comfortably say that Jim Palmer knows more about the rules of baseball than possibly anyone else alive. The dude is a baseball savant.

​@Skipjacks1 the moderator of this video and this channel has an extensive officiating background, and even if Palmer does have a working knowledge of the rules, safe to say doesn't come close to the knowledge of the narrator of this video No, rules are not subjective, though the interpretations sometimes are In this case, sure, frustrating But the guys on the field handled this, as they were supposed to, by RULE Don't like it, change the rule But everyone wants things to always be 50/50 in sports, which is impossible It was explained here perfectly If you can't say that he intentionally was throwing at them, as opposed to being just "bad" or "wild" , certain aspects of the rule can't be applied, as mentioned in the video So, to avoid POTENTIAL issues, you give warnings. And that's all it is, is a warning. Opposing manager always spins back, "why are you warning us" Well, that easy, as if you don't warn, be preventative, then that opens the door for them to retaliate, before a warning So, to avoid that, issue a warning to both sides. Essentially saying "Hey, it's stopping now, and if not, ejections will happen and the manager will go also" Again, things can't be 50/50, so this rule is fair, enough to mAke it work But egos get involved, and one team, here the Orioles, feel like they arnt getting their shot to retaliate, when they "havnt done anything " True, in a sense... but again, it's just a warning...

@@chuckfan1 My my aren't we touchy 🤣 I now see all I need to see here. You think your farts don't stink and are infailable. You have some weird need to be right to the point where you flagrantly misread the clearly worded rule you posted then claim you know more about the rules of baseball than Jim effing Palmer 🤣 who is a hall of fame player, broadcaster, and has been around the game since the 1960's. But yeah sure... you know more than he does because you umped a game before. Enjoy your narcissism 😁

It's a bad rule. I approve Hyde getting thrown out in an attempt to get the rule changed.

I'm comfortable saying that Palmer knows more about the GAME of baseball; screw the rules. Great, she's defending the rule because that's the way it's written. If a Hall of Famer basically says it's a bad rule - it's prolly a bad rule.

It’s almost like she’s a Yankee fan? What’s the purpose of ending the video showing the Yankees score their only run 😂

No not really it depends on the wording of the discussion . A player at bat for example can turn to an umpire and say where was that? DId it catch the outside etc and general discussions like that are allowed because it is not arguing. They can say that was terrible, I cant believe that, OMG are you kidding and most umpires let it go. But if they actually say anything argumentative like that was over the plate, you missed that call, you got that wrong, etc that gets them tossed. The rule that Lindsay shows explicitly that a specific physical action of leaving the dug out after a warning is an immediate ejection. The Umpire has no room to allow leeway as soon as he steps out he is gone. Again umpires usually give room where the rule allows this rule allows none. He could have bitched from the dug out and they probably would have said and done nothing but as soon as he left boom.

@@cameronfortnite8723 You clearly hasn't watched this channel and listen to her tear boone apart.

Did you even listen to Lindsay's rules explanation. Mangers are not allowed to come out after a warning. Period.

@@donh6416 no they dont

@@donh6416did you even read the comment on Rule 6.02(c)(9)? If a manager, coach or player leaves the dugout or their position to dispute a warning they should be warned to stop (didn’t look like Hyde was warned). And they are “subject” to ejection. “Subject” means they can be ejected. Not that they are immediately ejected. Any good umpire gives Hyde the leeway to at least say a few sentences and listen to what he is saying. Maybe Hyde just wanted clarification. Who knows. A good umpire doesn’t have a hair trigger. It’s the same for arguing balls and strikes. Rule book says you can’t argue balls and strikes or you are subject to ejection. But good umps give players and managers a little leeway.

@@theburnetts It all depends on the situation, if he was barking from the dugout before he left the dugout he had his leeway potentially. He also "went through the stop sign" so to speak. Not to mention usually when you're "subject to" or "subjected to" something like say a search, you are searched not, you can be searched. it comes down to discretion, but the ejection for leaving the position to argue a call that can't be argued and continuing after being warned are supported by the rule book. To use your ball/strike example umps give leeway to players to a degree cause they may be frustrated with themselves and stuff, and managers typically DO get ejected as soon as they leave the dugout to argue. Chirping from the dugout in moderation is often dismissed depending on who's doing it.

@donh6416 did you read the rule? It says they can't come out, after being warned, to argue.

Right? They are kinda shooting themselves in the foot because they want to secure their jobs from robo umps but at the same time do stuff like this

No new rule needed. The umps can toss anyone at any time. Happens quite frequently.

It's already under 602(c)(9)(A), but it relies heavily on judgment. I remember Joe West doing that a few years back. The pitcher was DFA'd immediately after the game.

You both are idiots who obviously haven’t watched close call sports. There is no rule that allows the umps to eject unless its intentional. They can only warn when theres no intent.

Every player matters nobody gets robbed in a 14-0 game if their on my team

He should have stayed in the dugout then

Goes to show you the lengths Hyde will go to back his guys up. He's gone up a few notches on my respect ladder.

@@Simba65315 so you're ok with your players getting beamed by a trash pitcher? Doesn't matter if you're winning or losing by 100 runs. You defend your guys.

@@brandondillman5841 thats what the warning is for. theres 0 chance that the manager didnt know what the warning was for. the warning protects players on both teams. if pitchers know that the next hbp is an ejection, then professional non petty players know that will be punished. are you ok with a pitcher who has clearly lost his control and is 100% not intentionally throwing a batter being assaulted by a batter who is hit with a change up or a curveball? or the benches clearing, a fight breaking out and your star player getting injured? players need to grow up and accept that ejections are punishment enough, they dont need to retaliate. beat your opponent on the scoreboard, not in number of hbps.

Because it was pretty ridiculous. Listen to his post game press conference. He wanted an explanation for the warnings and got tossed.

@@spoof1234 doesn't matter. It's an auto ejection by rule.

@@tonyradle8747 "by rule". I can give 1000 examples where an ejection didn't happen for more egregious actions by a manager.

Agreed. Issuing a warning to both teams is just stupid. Thats like a judge issuing a citation to an assault victim for getting in the way of his assailant's punches and then charging his lawyer for contempt of court for sticking up for him. Only one team needed to be warned and its not the team having to dodge baseballs.

@@commandershepard7742 Both teams are warned to 'prevent retaliation'. I do not like it, but its the way rules are written. The way I read the rules, either one person is ejected or both teams are warned.

Probably not. Just another quick trigger ejection.

He said in his press conference that he wanted to ask him why they just warned everyone instead of tossing the pitcher. All he had to say was "I didn't think it was intentional" and Hyde likely says "Ok" and goes back to the dugout. There's absolutely 0 chance that an O's pitcher retaliates in a 14-0 game. So he basically got tossed for asking for an explanation why.

I'm thinking maybe Iassogna was perturbed to see the manager of the team up by 14 runs walking out of the dugout towards him shouting. Maybe it's one of those unwritten rules of baseball?

@@spoof1234 Why would you say that a 14-0 gam is exactly when you retaliate. You can afford to have an unplanned pitcher up there and the base on balls. You don't do it when it can possibly cost you the game not the other way around.

@@spoof1234 Clearly in the rule, the Ump has 3 options: Eject when intentional Warn both teams when intentional Warn both teams when unintentional There is not a case where the Ump can warn just one team. A manager should know that.

No because the rule is explicit. Also he isn't an idiot both benches are warned to prevent retaliation and escalation.

I just love that one side can have 2 HbP, and if the other side now does the same thing because of 'natural wild pitches', they would have 2 ejections because the other team 'did it first' and caused both teams to get warnings. I know it is to 'prevent retaliation' but after warning, they do not have the leeway to determine if they are 'natural wild pitches' and the umps have painted themselves into a forced ejection.

@@ingiford175 That's not how it works, but OK.

@@teebob21 It is, in fact, how that works.

@@teebob21 The rules give umps 4 options on hbp: Unintentional: Do nothing Unintentional: Warn BOTH teams Intentional: Warn BOTH teams Intentional: Eject player Ump does not have the choice on an Unintentional to warn just ONE team.

almost as many as umpires that don't know the rules

@@poluticonmost umpires know the rules

A broadcaster's function is to call the game for the listening/viewing audience. They can't be expected to know every little nuance of today's absurdly rule-entrenched game. Having said that, they also should be less definitive on the air about calls or non-calls about which they are unsure. Former broadcaster here. And I stress the word 'absurdly' above.

@@joeschmoe6667 you'd be surprised...

You're just now realizing that? Lol

A Yankee Hater? I LOVE you! Would you marry me? 😅

@@bhamsoxfan72 I'm sorry, your not really my "type" and I am happily married already lol.

Ik pretty sure that pitcher got warned before being tossed

I don't think the umps can warn justc1 team.

​@steveschutte4990 sure they can, she just showed the rule in the video

I would say never. I don't think the rules allow you to warn one team. All the references I could find about a warning in Rule 6.02(c)(9) states that both teams get warned.

@@steveschutte4990 They can but they typically do not because they do not want retaliation and escalation.

​@johndimarzio8966 what rule did you read? The rule clearly states BOTH teams must be warned.

I question whether you've ever seen this channel before. These guys are umpires.

@@bhamsoxfan72 I've umpried in several leagues, but would never use it as authority in this situation, since we don't know what was said on the field. The channel owner is making assumptions of intent and remi's comment is far more objective.

@@1georgekitchen I'm a soccer referee, not an umpire, but it looks like the rule is 100% simple and straightforward - it's the act of exiting the dugout that is the basis for the ejection, not what was said.

@@bhamsoxfan72 The letter of the law argument is invalidated by the 1,000 examples of it not being enforced. When the oriole batter was the one that was hit and the coach was being civil, this would be the most sensible time to not enforce the rule.

@@1georgekitchen Idk about 1,000s of times of it not enforced. I don't have time to watch that much baseball...

If baseball managers actually want pitchers tossed for being bad and just mearly hitting batters unintentionally they have a recourse, change the rule. Umpires don't make the rules they just enforce them, managers have the clout to go to Manfred and get rules changed if they want.

@@stratbaseballmanExactly

If Jim palmer said you could have 4 strikes and 3 balls would you defend him then too? It doesn’t matter who a person is if they are stating an incorrect rule.

Jim Palmer played under Earl Weaver. Could you imagine if this poor ump had to deal with the Earl of Baltimore? He would have been caked in dirt and probably holding back tears. Weaver was a beast. I met a man who umpired the AL in 1970's and he told me he hated when he hated to ump Orioles games and Yankees games, he especially hated it when the Orioles and Yankees played each other. In one dugout he had Billy Martin and in the other he had Earl Weaver and he just knew he was going to get dirt kicked on him at some point in the game.

I trust Jim Palmer to basically say that it's a bad rule.

Also Simba - The strikeout can basically be traced to 1858. The number of balls was sorted out in the decade between 1879 and 1889, when it went from as many pitches as you wanted until you found something you wanted to hit, to 9 balls, and whittled on down to 4. So for well over 100 years those have been the magic numbers - and no one has disputed those as a good rules. The warning rule has always been a shit show and "frustrating" to say the least. Can't find when it was changed, but when you have Bobby Cox saying "the old way was better - you got it (retaliation) out of the way and move on." The way the rule is written and enforced, it doesn't actually get rid of retaliation - it delays it, and can lead to a "get in the first blow" mentality.

@@NoelSchively so without it if a team feels a retaliation was not warranted you have escalating retaliations until everyone is thrown out or a fight breaks out. No one wants to see Pedro throwing Zimmer to the floor or Nolan Ryan putting Ventura in a headlock. That’s not baseball. That’s ice hockey.

So, you're totally fine with players getting drilled by fastballs? The score is irrelevant. A good manager always sticks up for his players. Judge is going to get a few heaters in the ribs when he's back.

The rule is literally on screen. The manager may not come onto the playing surface after a warning. Perhaps the manager should read the rulebook.

@@Simba65315the rule clearly says subjective, it’s not an auto ejection. The ump could have listened for a second; stated why he gave both a warning. Instead the ump having great people skills says get lost.

Rules says both teams are warned. I do not see a situation in the rules that were posted where the umpire had the option to only warn one team. It seemed like: Intentional: Either eject or warn both teams Unintentional: warn both teams

You mean the one that's essentially "When the ump says stop, you stop" is badly written? In your opinion, what should the rule be then since you wanted it looked at again?

That is the intent of the rule...Its only poorly written if you don't think they want warnings argued. There was a time where the retalitory back and forth beaning of batters was getting out of hand and opposing managers were getting livid because they want a chance to bean the otherside back and then get a warning MLB said no way happening too often

@@ericwildfong the ump never told Hyde to stop anything. lol. Just tossed him. It's all good though. Judge is going to be getting a few heaters in the ribs when he gets back. Baseball players don't forget crap like this.

@@brandondillman5841 RIght..... cause obviously you know exactly what was said on the field. Regardless, it's still leaving your position to argue a call that can't be argued which is still grounds for ejection.

@@ericwildfong it is, but the umps rarely enforce that rule. Managers leave the dugout every single time their team gets warned for no reason. They never get tossed unless they're trying to show up the ump. Never seen an ump immediately throw out a manager for asking a simple question.

Hope she enjoyed the 14 run drumming 🤣

The warning is always issued to both teams, by rule. If Hyde needed that explained to him, he doesn't bong in the dugout.

Maybe, but in this case it appeared that the pitcher did not have his release point. This caused him to be wild. A pitcher cannot be ejected from the game unless it was an intentional act. A warning is the most the umpires could do in this situation. The rulebook doesn't allow the umpires to remove a pitcher from the game simply because they are wild.

NY has shitty pitching right now.

Forty years ago. He hasn't played for *forty* years. The rules have changed since then & Palmer clearly hasn't kept up with them.

The rule is literally on screen and his comments go directly against those rules. You’d be surprised how many World Series Champion players don’t know the entire rulebook.

@@Simba65315 it's impossible to understand the rules when they're never enforced consistently. Hyde has exited the dugout several times before to question calls without being ejected. This time he doesn't get a word out before being ejected.

@@brandondillman5841 zero chance he doesnt know what the warning is for. theres no need to retaliate against a pitcher who has clearly lost his control. take your base and pile on the runs if you want revenge.

Knowing more than the broadcasters is a very low bar. 10% Boone probably knows more than most broadcasters.

What the fuck was he standing up for the right to throw back at NY the next inning. Opposing pitcher got warned that what the rule allows. The entire crew met before they took action all he is doing is wasting time and grandstanding.

She never played the sport and it shows.

It wouldn't help much, if at all. The high school soccer coaches in my area have to take a rules test before the start of the season, and I've heard arguments from some coaches that are dumber than things spectators say. And one of the D1 college coaches in my city studied the rule book well enough to be able to quote some of it, and he still got things wrong. You don't think that coaches and managers study the rules looking for loopholes (Bill Belichick)?

I don’t think Kevin Brown, Jim Palmer, Ben McDonald, etc need to be educated on the rules 😂

enforced rules are different than the actual written rules, 99% of the time the manager gets much more leeway than that

@@deesnuts1 Not with warnings they don’t… the rules in place give ZERO tolerance to arguing them… Yes, most don’t like them.. they want to retaliate… still… the rules are the rules and on this one.. they are ALWAYS enforced this way.. yeah, they get more leeway with most arguments.. but not on this subject they don’t…

Mets booth tends to be pretty good with the rules. They'll even display the text on the screen sometimes like CCS if the producer can find it quickly enough. Gary Cohen and Ron Darling both tend to stick to business interpreting what's going on, and Keith always just gives his opinion whether he likes the rule or not (which is why we love him!) lol.

@@VisibilityFoggy I will admit that though Ron Darling was a pitcher.. he is very knowledgable about the rules. I would not be surprised that he was a very good 2-way player before getting drafted… though I also know, one of the worst I’ve ever seen is HOF’er Joe Morgan… that man I swear didn’t ever even see the cover of the rulebook.. say nothing about reading it… The one thing I usually use as a litmus test for announcers.. if they can tell the difference between Interference and obstruction….

tbh probably figured they were losing anyway, no reason to tire out the rest of the bullpen.

@@duelist301 is that normal for such situations?

@@fifiwoof1969 Not usually.

no its not you do not understanding what going on here. 1. mlb has made umpires get togather to talk about warings if need to be or not compare to allowing htem just to do it themselves. the rules state you can't agure there is waring to stop you don't stop you gone

@@critter2 in the case of Hyde coming out to argue, the rule states that he should be warned to go back to the dugout and stop. The umpire didn’t seem to warn him and pulled a quick trigger. Hyde literally only got a few words out of his mouth and was ejected. The only way I would understand this is if Hyde used some sort of foul language that should result in an ejection that quick.

Orioles broadcaster Jim Palmer is ignorant of the rules. And played with them.

lol that was my first thought

Lindsay been doing ejection reviews FOR EVERY MLB ejection since 2011.

@@Stryyder1 wow, since 2011?? No way! I guess that makes her wiser than Hyde, who played since 1997, and Jim Palmer, the orioles announcer who has 3 cy youngs and started playing in 1964..

@@1georgekitchen She has the most important qualification: She has actually read the rulebook. I doubt Jim Palmer has cracked it open once in his life, and I doubt Hyde's looked at it very thoroughly either.

The rule is literally never enforced.....nobody actually knows the rules anymore. It's all umpire discretion.

This is the same Yankees that lost 10-2 to the Mariners just over 2 weeks ago. They can't seem to do much without their star player Aaron Judge.

@@Yumi_JayAnd the other supporting cast.

@@Yumi_Jay Run production with judge avg 5 per game 4th best in the league, without judge 3.5 almost worst in the league. Regardless its a pitching issue giving up 10+ runs a game is the issue.

MLB is probably embarrassed by the way the umps handled the situation. Hyde definitely isn't getting fined. Aaron Judge is definitely getting drilled in the ribs next time they play though. Assuming he doesn't get hurt again before hand.

​@@brandondillman5841they should try to aim for his toe instead

@@hello21707 lol