TCU wins on a walk-off strikeout, a breakdown 

I’m here for this one. No hustle no rushed bad throw no walk off win.

@@DennisCarmodysame 🙏🏽

Good on number 20.

Exactly ever thought the base runner did most of the work. The hustle of the guy made the play happen, especially since he ran into the first baseman

@@CoutureThugFB was not positioned to catch the throw. I don’t think he was focused on the play before it came his way. He was in the wrong side of the base runner’s path, and by the time the ball was thrown, the base runner’s body possibly blocked his view of a not-great throw. If he had been paying attention, he would have been shifted a few feet to his right to make the play.

the beauty of baseball

They're a stiff glove so that your fingers don't jam & break when sliding into a bag

@@bradwurst8141 and so that you have an extra couple inches to touch the bag sooner

I'd say it was more because the throw was just a bit too late, rather than off the mark. But change the word obstruction to interference, and you're one of the few in this comment section understanding and applying the rule correctly.

It's not obstruction because obstruction is only called when a runner's progress toward a base is impeded.

Nooooooo!!!!

Crazy accurate too

Legendary quote

Can't unsee now

Since it was strike three, the batter would have been out and it would have been the third and final out to end the 9th inning. They would have then had to go to extra innings. Baseball has this weird rule if the catcher doesn't catch the ball on strike three (either wild pitch or pops out of his glove), the batter can make an attempt to get to first base. Usually the batter gets thrown out, but when they don't it's great. 😁

If the catcher caught the strike the inning would've been over and the game would've gone onto to extra innings. Since the catcher missed the catch of the third strike the batter has the right to make a run for first base. Normally they don't get there and are tagged or thrown out at first but in this case the throw to first was on the wrong side and everything fell apart

as discussed by some other comments... the point of the rule is the defense must have positive control of the ball at the end of an inning for the inning to end in the defenses favor. since the catcher dropped the ball, no one on the defense has the ball, so the offense is not out.... "yet". once the catcher retrieves the ball, all other rules are now viable for getting the out. the weirder part is how this is recorded for the pitcher versus how it is recorded for the defense

@@grondhero Thanks a lot that makes sense. Same as cricket then, if the wicket keeper (catcher) fumbles the ball the batters can still run but I guess it's more high reward in Baseball. Like you said, great to watch a high risk/high reward play work out!

@@Prince19912Nice, good to see the batter and runner take full advantage of the mistakes.

Came here to say this as well. It was all on the catcher. He should've just held the ball due to the angle he had to throw to first. He didn't have time to step inside or outside which helped contributing to the bad throw. That runner meant nothing at all.

​@@dannycole125 Exactly; his first thought should have been on the runner at 2nd the moment the ball passed him. Kid believed he could end the game with his arm and got burnt.

Additionally, the ball's late. If the universe turned off clipping for the two people, the runner is still safe at first, because even the first baseman reaches through the runner, he can't get the ball. If anything, it's some kind of illegal obstruction by the first baseman. Heads up play from the guy who throws home. He did his best to salvage the mess.

The only way this was obstruction is if the first baseman was deemed to have halted the batter-runner's ability to go to second base. Since the batter-runner didn't even attempt it and he would have easily been thrown out without the contact, there's no way obstruction would have been called.

Yeah you guys are confusing obstruction and interference

The catcher should have instead thrown to the pitcher covering home and then try to get him in a rundown or run him back to third.

@@AEMoreira81 Runner wouldn't have gone home if catcher had eaten the ball. He was given a stop sign. He only ran home because of the botched play at first. If the catcher eats the throw or throws it to the pitcher covering home then he obviously doesn't run.

Excellent explanation

Throw should be on foul side of bag. Even if late or if it pulls 1B off the bag, the return throw home would probably catch runner-or keep him at third.

@@MwD676 I think that's why they didn't try to call interference on the runner. He established his lane, stuck to it, and made no attempt to interfere with the throw. The catcher just threw it to the wrong side of the bag, and/or didn't just hold the ball like he should have.

Read the no 1 New York Times bestseller: DROPPED 3RD STRIKE RULE. Critics are calling it "Riveting" and "A Great Read"

@@Fryed_Bryce Yeah because he didn't bat in anybody. It's such a weird rule but I think it makes some crazy final moments when it does benefit the batter, but rarely does it ever that I don't think it's worth changing.

@@blindfire3167 that was the opinion of one of the articles I read. Basically it’s not disruptive and everyone understands what’s happening even if they don’t know all the rule entails. The most interesting part was its relationship to the strike out, they essentially were created together.

the basic theory applies that the defense has to be in possession of the ball for the offense to be out. there are rare cases where a batted ball touches a runner, you have offensive interference and spectator interference. all which involve the changing the course of a play which basically means you messed with the defense’s chance to be in possession of the ball to put you out

It only applies if there are 2 outs or if first bass is open.

Mitch Moreland…now that’s a guy I haven’t thought about in a while

@@Lonesurvivor256 Easy guy to root for

I was going to say Moreland only came up ten years ago and then I realized it actually has been almost 15 years 😅

September 29, 2010, Dan Cortese pitching

He scored from first, even! And it was a wild pitch instead of a passed ball. Otherwise it was exactly the same as this. Bottom 9th, 2 outs, 5-5. 1B set up on the foul side of the bag but the throw went to the fair side. But 1B was more heads-up and avoided colliding with Nelly. Thank you for remembering this!

I think from his angle he didn't see the runner

Also threw a fucking meatball to second allowing the SB.

I stand by it being a foul tip at .25x

@@chichiboo17 not a foul tip if the catcher doesn't control it. But I get what you're saying. If it contacts the bat, it's a foul ball and the runner stays on 2nd. Personally I don't see the ball change direction until it contacts the catcher's mitt.

If you play it at .25x it looks like there was a very small foul tip. Take a look

His team lost.

@@MarcosElMalo2 yes. But he gets the loss. He gets the loss for getting an out

I can feel for the officials, too. This is a close call that potentially decides the game. The first baseman inexplicably set himself in foul territory. If he had positioned himself inside and stretched, the timing of the throw would have been close, as you say. The rule calls for interference if the throw could "reasonably retire" the runner. To me, that leaves open considering the baseman's position, and it's justifiable not to call interference here. He was not well positioned to stretch towards and receive the throw in time. But it's a judgement call, completely subjective, and made on the field in real-time. They reviewed it, but overturning the field call usually requires a higher standard.

@@drakono82 What if the first baseman stood where he was because of the runner's not being in the lane? I don't think the rules are written with the intention that the first baseman will stand stoically in the canonical position and allow the runner who is outside of the lane to run into him. That would be unreasonable, because it's against human nature. It's in the fielder's nature to try to make the catch, which means avoiding the runner, even if the runner shouldn't have been there. The rule constrains the runner's position. The runner was out of the allowed lane, and the ball would have been within reach of the fielder, and it could have arrived in time. Therefore the runner should be called out for interference. It seems very straightforward to me. If they're not going to make the call in this situation, then there's no reason to have the lane on the field.

Yes, or pump fake to see if the runner on 2nd bites, but you never throw late down the line.

A third strike needs to be caught. If it is dropped, the runner is allowed to attempt to advance to first base. He needs to be thrown out at first for the out to be recorded. If he makes it before, he is safe and no out is recorded.

On a dropped third strike the batter can attempt to run to first. The defense only gets the out if they tag the runner or get the forceout at first. That's why you'll see catchers immediately tag the batter if the batter swings at the third strike and the ball hits the dirt.

The catcher has to catch the ball cleanly for a strikeout to count, if they don't, the batter can try to run to first. This only applies if there is either 2 outs, or first base is unoccupied at the time of the pitch. So if there is 1 out and someone on first, they are just out. If there is 1 out, and nobody on first, they are not out, if there is 2 out, they are not out no matter what. It makes sense if you consider that every other normal way to get out requires a fielder to have control of the ball. The reason the batter is out if someone is on first, is because it would make it really easy for the defense to get a double play if they batter could run. It would basically become a strategy to drop the ball on purpose.

So this is whats known as the "dropped 3rd strike". This applies to all leagues even up to the majors. Ever notice in the majors when someone strikes out at a ball in the dirt the catcher tags them? Thats why. If the ball hits the dirt the batter has a right to challenge the throw to first, normally this isnt an issue since if the ball is dropped in front of the catcher its a very very simple throw. When a wild pitch happens thats when the batter gets 1st base on a strikeout. The 3rd out isnt in the books until the 1st base umpire signals an out. Therefore the play is live all the way until that 2nd base runner scores the winning run

Thanks!@@MadMat418

Plus, the FB, in moving from outside to inside (L->R), was standing over the bag, blocking the runner.

@@MarcosElMalo2 if the umpires had called obstruction on 1B, they would have had to disallow the run, since it happened before the runner crossed the plate!