camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

"Give me a break! Canon, top rated? By Canon. This person is not a pro and Nikon will serve him well." I am in agreement here.
I do not know what type of sports you are going to shoot and I do not know your budget either. Being a beginner you have a lot to learn, especially shooting fast sequence photography.
There are many cameras in the market that will do the job and many very good lenses too.

Canon70D

Don't let anyone tell you that either Nikon or Canon is better than the other. They both make excellent cameras that will be able to give you great results. I would go to a camera shop that sells multiple brands (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic/Lumix, etc.) and give them a try to see what you think. Ask about lens options to get an idea of the ecosystem. Also if you have friends with camera like the kind you are interested, talk to them and see what they think. Play around with their cameras.

hookedupin2005 Loc: Northwestern New Mexico

And so will a myriad of other cameras......

DaveC1 Loc: South East US

Actually at the Winter Olympics in South Korea the Japanese sports press was almost 100% Nikon.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

First, you must decide the type of camera you want. There's DSLR, mirrorless, or compact. Price plays a big part in selecting a camera. When you narrow your choices, Google camera comparisons and compare your choices.

https://www.google.com/search?q=camera+comparison+sites&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS729US729&oq=camera+comparison+sites&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.6887j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

But he asked for a beginner-type camera.

ltj123 Loc: NW Wisconsin

Some really funny comment regarding camera brands! Canon is a very good brand, AND so is Nikon, and so are several other brands.
As a beginner pick a camera that is easy for you to use, a local camera shop might be best to provide information/knowledge on this.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

I agree the D7200 would be a better choice, but since he asked for a beginner-type camera I included the other two as well.

hj Loc: Florida

The OP asked about a beginner-type camera and everyone is trying to sell the idea of a DSLR..... for softball. Yeah right, break the bank with camera and many suitable lenses. The OP should start with a good bridge camera that has great controls similar to a DSLR and GREAT ZOOM for a fraction of the price. This person is not professional. Let them get their feet wet first in photography at a reasonable cost and if they decide to later up grade, they can.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

A good bridge camera with AF performance and a focal length suitable for active subjects along with an electronic viewfinder is not really that much cheaper than a decent entry level camera to do the same. Breaking the bank is not necessary, DSLR, Mirrorless or Bridge Cameras that can do this all range from around $600 to as much as $1700. And this does not include refurbished, open box, or used. Let the OP decide what price point is going to work and decide what tradeoffs are worth making with the lower priced options.

drklrd Loc: Cincinnati Ohio

Only because of price is Canon always seen around a lot. Ask any parent shooting their kids sports. I know because I have asked them while shooting high school sports as a pro.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

I agree completely. You are the first one to recommend a bridge camera. Probably the best choice for a first time photographer, for too many reasons to mention. If there is a decent camera store near you, that should be your first stop. Once you get comfortable with your bridge camera (6 months or a year--no rush) then you can look for a more sophisticated /expensive- camera. And you can keep the other camera as a back up. P.S. I am very tired of the Canon/Nikon- which is best thing

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I disagree. The D500 is probably the best DX or APS-C camera out there, but compared to a D750 it is noisier at high ISOs. Compared to a D800 or D810, it captures less detail and is also noisier. There is no question that a good FX Nikon will provide better image quality. I've done some direct comparisons between a borrowed D500, and my D800, D810 and even my D700. All the full frames offered better image quality. There is one thing that everyone who looks at this seem to not be aware of - you have to take into consideration that you need to magnify the crop sensor image 50% more to get to the same size print or screen view - and therein lies the hitch. Increasing the magnification also increases flaws, image softness, noise, etc. So no, unless you are making direct comparisons with real cameras in hand, there is no way you can arrive at your conclusions. I can post some images that I kept from the D500 vs D800, but I am leaving for a 2 week trip in a bit so I won't be able to do it today. In the meantime there is nothing stopping you from posting your images to support your claims.

dynaquest1 Loc: Austin, Texas

First of all, know this: Cameras do not take good pictures, people do.

Before you spend a lot of money on a new DSLR you might stop using after the first 90 days, go back about five years and buy a good quality Nikon or Canon "cropped" sensor body and a couple inexpensive lenses. Learn it, play with it, experiment with it...learn it some more. Then if you like what you are doing and are getting good results that make you happy, buy something better. Closets around the world are full of dusty treadmills and DSLR cameras.