6 days ago
Little League Bat-Flip Suspension Sparks New Jersey Dad's Lawsuit
The father of a boy suspended from participating in Thursday's New Jersey Little League State Tournament because he flipped his bat after hitting a home run has sued Little League Baseball. The suit filed Tuesday in a New Jersey superior court seeks a restraining order that would allow his son to play in the 12-and-under game.
Represented by attorneys Brian A. Berkley and Michael Fitzgerald of Fox Rothschild, Joseph Rocco says his son, Marco, was feeling a 'rush of excitement, pride and joy' when he homered last Wednesday in the 2025 Little League Baseball Tournament Section 4 New Jersey Championship. Rocco acknowledged Marco, who plays for the Haddonfield Little League 12U All-Star district team, did a 'bat flip' before he began his home run trot around the bases.
More from
Riverside Faces Sex-Abuse Trial as Judge Denies Summary Judgment
Rare Honus Wagner Card Hits Auction, Early Bids Pass $3.2 Million
Riverside's Defense Rebuked in Youth Basketball Sex Abuse Case
Rocco's case will face hurdles, as judges are usually reluctant to Monday morning quarterback umpires' judgment calls. Sports associations are also typically accorded broad deference in how they apply their own rules, especially when safety is a factor.
Whether a bat flip is an appropriate gesture for a baseball player, let alone a child in Little League, has long sparked debates in baseball. Some regard it as showy and distasteful, including to the pitcher who gave up the homer, while others see it more—as Rocco put it—'a brief moment of celebration to admire an athletic accomplishment that some would call the most difficult task in all of sports.'
It seems the home plate umpire was in the former group.
Rocco says the umpire intended to call Marco out and void the home run, but after conferring with other umpires and allegedly a tournament director and regional headquarters in Connecticut (but not, Rocco claims, the Tournament Committee in Williamsport), the home run was deemed to count. But the good news quickly turned bad for Marco: He was ejected from the game, which under the rules renders him ineligible for Thursday's state tournament. Rocco says the umpires neither explained the decision nor gave warning 'prior to this more egregious and arbitrary decision.'
Sportico has obtained Rocco's complaint and an accompanying brief for showing cause. They raise a breach of contract claim on the theory that Rocco paid dues for Marco to play Little League, and now his son can't play.
Negligence is also alleged, with Little League portrayed as breaching a duty of care to Marco by suspending him 'without warning, justification, explanation, or reasoning.' There's also a claim for promissory estoppel, which refers to Rocco detrimentally relying on the promise that his son could play Little League if Rocco paid dues.
Rocco asserts there are many examples of Little League players performing bat flips without being tossed from their games and that there is no specific rule outlawing the practice. In fact, Rocco claims, Marco performed two bat flips in recent games and wasn't warned by the umpires, let alone thrown out of the game. The brief also repeatedly mentions that in recent years, Little League social media platforms have, in a positive light, shown players flipping bats. Major League Baseball itself launched a marketing campaign in 2019 titled, 'Let the Kids Play,' featuring star players celebrating with bat flips and more in an attempt to distance itself from the game's staid emotional reputation while catering to a younger generation of fans.
But not all bat flips are equal—which could become a key point in Rocco v. Little League.
The brief references what it says were communications between Rocco's attorneys and Little League 'in an effort to settle this matter' without a lawsuit. As the brief tells it, Little League says Marco's bat flip was 'extreme' and not only 'far exceeded a celebratory bat flip that players on occasion indulge in' but 'actually endangered the safety of the catcher, the plate umpire and [Marco's] own team, and was a clear violation of the standards of sportsmanship and safety required by [Little League's] rules.'
The response also allegedly referenced rules prohibiting 'horse play' and 'intentional throwing of equipment' that could endanger others.
Rocco disputes this depiction of his son's bat flip. He says the flip 'was nowhere near the umpire or catcher' and that Marco's 'teammates did not enter the field until the bat was on the ground.'
Rocco insists an injunction is warranted since his son would suffer irreparable harm—meaning a harm that can't be remedied by money. Marco, the brief argues, 'will suffer substantial, immediate and irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief.'
To that end, Rocco asserts, Marco 'will not be able to participate in game one of the New Jersey Little League State Tournament. This game will never occur again and [Marco] will never have the opportunity to play in this game ever again.' The brief also contends that 'Little League will not be injured whatsoever if [Marco] is allowed to participate in this game.'
When Little League responds to the court filing, it will disagree that Marco playing would cause the association no injury. Little League has an interest in applying its rules and not having judges second-guess game decisions. Little League will argue those decisions are non-reviewable. This is not a new topic in sports law. Judges have generally steered clear of reversing or altering officiating calls, because once they do so, other athletes, teams and parents could feel incentivized to sue.
In 2014, Oklahoma District Court Judge Bernard Jones presided over a lawsuit, Independent School District No. 1-89 v. Oklahoma Secondary School Activities Association, involving a clearly bad call in a high school playoff football game—the referee negated a touchdown due to misunderstanding a rule, and the team that had been wronged lost by one point. Jones sympathized with the defeated team but said judges 'ought not to meddle' in games. The judge also stressed that athletic associations have the right to interpret their own rules without judicial interference. Referee interpretations are upheld unless they are arbitrary and capricious—an extremely deferential standard of review.
A similar outcome occurred last year in New Jersey. A referee's bad call on a game-winning 3-pointer in the Group 2 boys basketball semifinal between Manasquan High School and Camden High School led to a challenge that came up short. The reason: The call, even if wrong, was final, conclusive and unrevivable.
But sometimes legal challenges involving youth athletes prevail in New Jersey. Earlier this year, a New Jersey judge ruled that St. John Vianney wrestler Anthony Knox Jr. could compete for a state championship after he faced a New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association (NJSIAA) suspension for violating the organization's sportsmanship policy. During a tournament, Knox had left the bench area and allegedly partook in an altercation in the stands. A judge reasoned Knox had been denied due process. Knox's case is different from the one involving Marco Rocco, including because the NJSIAA is a state actor, meaning it is a public entity and can be sued on constitutional grounds. Still, Knox's win might provide hope to Joseph Rocco and his son.
Rocco insists his case is a winner. What happened to Marco, as the elder Rocco sees it, wasn't about a called strike or ball, whether a line drive stayed fair or veered foul or some other judgment call. It was instead about process and reflects a wrong that the law ought to remedy.
Whether a judge agrees remains to be seen. A judge might regard what happened as a reasonable umpire decision about safety and appropriate behavior in a youth sports event and not one that warrants a court's time and attention. Said another way, not all harms are legal ones.
Expect a swift decision with the game set for Thursday.
Best of
College Athletes as Employees: Answering 25 Key Questions
