In baseball games, there are instances where a pitcher deliberately targets a batsman of the opposing team with a pitch in order to retaliate against a previous strike on their own player by the opposing team. The present study focusing on major league baseball aimed to clarify the nature of the responsibility sensed a pitcher who finds himself in a similar position after a batsman on his team has taken an intentional hit from the opposing team's pitcher in order to analyze the structure of the pitcher's dilemma. We looked at the situation not only from the viewpoint in which the pitcher's responsibility is considered an obligation, as proposed by Takikawa, but also from the obligations concept proposed by Sandel.   We found that there is a responsibility to comply with the official baseball rules to discourage any retaliatory hit on a batsman in order to avoid any intentional injury to a member of the opponent's team. On the other hand, responsibility for an intentional hit on a batman can be considered an obligation in order to implement an unwritten rule that condones such retaliatory action. Therefore the structure of the responsibility is considered to be an obligation that generates a dilemma for the pitcher and promotes conflict. On this basis, the difficulty of resolving the problem related to a retaliatory hit was highlighted. Furthermore, the possibility of analysis in accordance with the responsibility concept for ethical issues in sport was suggested.   We discuss the concept of responsibility as an obligation that presents a conflict, and consider which course of action should have priority in such cases.