Sports News Without Access, Favor, Or Discretion

Little League Coach Melts Down; Parent Urges Therapy And Medication

A tipster passed along this email exchange from a recent little league dispute that is just a wonderful example of how stupid and petty and irrational children can be. These kids, especially whichever little tyke wrote the scathing reply, have got some real 50-cent words in their back pockets, too.

Child A was upset that his team, the Mudhens, had to forfeit a game when it was discovered they ran afoul of a rule that required all players to play at least two innings in the infield during a game. After consulting the rulebook, he determined this was an unfair decision and sent an email demanding action. He then received a reply from Child B, who called him, among other things, a sociopath.


Here is the exchange, with Child A's email first:


To all of you,

As many of you may have heard, there was a protest filed by the Riverdogs managers at some point during or after the Minors Championship Game was suspended with the score tied after 7 innings due to darkness. The game was scheduled to resume last evening at 6 pm at Lincoln.

Yesterday afternoon it was brought to my attention that there was a problem regarding the Minimum Innings in Infield rule which is stated in the Spring 2013 Lexington Little League Exceptions (see below).

The League Commissioners ruled that the Mudhens violated this rule and awarded the Riverdogs the Minor League Championship

C. Rule: 3.03 Player Positions, Sit Outs, and Batting Order

NOTE: Sit outs refer only to defensive play during an inning: There are no sit outs for batting.

NOTE: It is preferred by LLL that all players play the outfield at least once each game.

Exception: POSITIONS: Each game, each player must be assigned to play 2 innings of infield.

The rule clearly states that each player must play a minimum of 2 innings in the infield DURING A GAME, NOT DURING THE FIRST 6 INNINGS.

When the game was suspended Wednesday evening due to darkness, we were still in a regulation game as defined by Little League Rule 4.10 (A)

Refer to 2013 Rulebook, page 66

Rule 4.10 (a) A regulation game consists of six innings, unless extended because of a tie, or shortened (1) because the home team needs none of it's half of the sixth inning.

Based on the Little League's definition of a regulation game and the Lexington Little League's rule regarding minimum infield play during such game, there is NO VIOLATION on the part of the Mudhens.

Coincidently, the manner in which this protest was filed and acted upon was incorrect and completely counter to Little League Baseball rules, Lexington Little League exceptions and the spirit of the game. See Rule 4.19 on page 69 of the rulebook.

How can a ruling resulting in a winner or loser of a ballgame be levied when the game was in suspension and not completed???

Lastly, let me just say that this game was one of the most incredible and exciting games of baseball I have ever witnessed or been a part of. It is disgusting and shameful that the opportunity for this game to be decided on the field by these great kids was taken away from them because of the rash and incorrect decisions of Lexington Little League.

We want to play ball and settle this on the field and then go shake hands and celebrate a great season WITH the Riverdogs, win or lose. This was an incredible 7 innings of baseball and the kids and parents deserve to have this game completed.

On behalf of my team, the parents and all of the supporters we have, I demand that this decision be reversed and the game completed in a timely manner or that the Mudhens are declared Minor League Co-Champions via an email to every parent and coach in Minor League baseball.

Please let me know soon which decision you choose. I will not accept any other options.

Thank you.

A little hysterical, but not too crazy? It seems like he may even have a point. Well, just look at the reply he got from Child B, one of 24 people he cc'd.

From: Lexington Family [redacted] Date: June 22, 2013, 12:12:34 PM EDT To: [redacted] Cc: Subject: Re: MINOR LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP

Dear [redacted]:

Your email below exhibits all that's wrong with Little League when midlife loser men try to fulfill their lost sports dreams by using innocent 9-10 year old boys.

First, I think you require years of therapy to resolve your internal conflicts and self-loathing. Second, medication such as Lithium may be an appropriate management tool. Please consult your psychiatrist.

The way you constantly use the term "championship" demonstrates your sociopathic nature. These kids are more concerned with getting that after game icecream than some imaginary "championship". And you are just a volunteer baby sitter, not some baseball "manager". What a joke.

Look, you didn't follow the rules. Period. Whether you did it deliberately or not, is up for debate. But I find it hard to believe you weren't aware of the rules to play everyone in IF so as to give everyone a chance...yes, even if it puts your beloved CHAMPIONSHIP at risk.

Regarding your "managing", I have observed many of your games. You know nothing about baseball strategy and more so, you don't realize that you are dealing with 9 year olds, not 19 year olds. What a joke.

I suggest you issue a public apology to the entire list below, say you were just joking, then move to Bedford. You are an embarrassment to the great town of Lexington.

Also spare us the attorney act arguing little league law. Again, therapy and medication should help resolve this.

Thanks, chump.

This is your irrefutable proof that things never, ever change. Nerdling Q. Bookmeister adjusts his glasses and quotes the rules and Steak Muscleman calls him a nerd.

Share This Story