Blocking the plate.

[mdbdotcom]

When he set up to catch the ball he as blocking the plate as well, and under the old rule Davis could have and would have run him over. If the runner can't run over the catcher, the catcher shouldn't be able to block the plate with or without the ball That's the problem with the rule.

If the runner has possession of the ball and is blocking the plate (which he can do once he has the ball), the runner can collide with him as long as the runner does not change direction in order to initiate the collision.

For those who haven't read it, here's the rule.

OFFICIAL BASEBALL RULE 7.13

Collisions at home plate

A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate). If, in the judgment of the umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) in such a manner, the umpire shall declare the runner out (even if the player covering home plate loses possession of the ball). In such circumstances, the umpire shall call the ball dead, and all other baserunners shall return to the last base touched at the time of the collision.

Rule 7.13 comment: The failure by the runner to make an effort to touch the plate, the runner's lowering of the shoulder, or the runner's pushing through with his hands, elbows or arms, would support a determination that the runner deviated from the pathway in order to initiate contact with the catcher in violation of Rule 7.13. If the runner slides into the plate in an appropriate manner, he shall not be adjudged to have violated Rule 7.13. A slide shall be deemed appropriate, in the case of a feet first slide, if the runner's buttocks and legs should hit the ground before contact with the catcher. In the case of a head first slide, a runner shall be deemed to have slid appropriately if his body should hit the ground before contact with the catcher.

Unless the catcher is in possession of the ball, the catcher cannot block the pathway of the runner as he is attempting to score. If, in the judgment of the umpire, the catcher without possession of the ball blocks the pathway of the runner, the umpire shall call or signal the runner safe. Notwithstanding the above, it shall not be considered a violation of this Rule 7.13 if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in order to field a throw, and the umpire determines that the catcher could not have fielded the ball without blocking the pathway of the runner and that contact with the runner was unavoidable.

[CA-ORIOLE]

This rule causes so much confusion and split second thinking for the baserunner and catcher. It's probably going to end up causing more injuries, with runners contorting their bodies to avoid hitting the catcher because they're so afraid of doing it, than plate collisions ever caused.

Yeha, and I'm surprised we haven't seen more of this.

[AdamK]

This rule causes so much confusion and split second thinking for the baserunner and catcher. It's probably going to end up causing more injuries, with runners contorting their bodies to avoid hitting the catcher because they're so afraid of doing it, than plate collisions ever caused.

Yeha, and I'm surprised we haven't seen more of this.

Hardy's thumb against St. Louis, and we are lucky nothing happened to Caleb when Beltran needlessly plowed him during the 2 error run down against MFY. That Caleb contact resulted directly in a second run because he was seeing stars when Norris casually tosses him the ball.

It was a bad stretch of plays at the plate that was (deservingly so) overshadowed by the 60th anniversary celebration/love fest, but I bet the team paid attention.

[Outlander]

Buck did request the review. The crew chief had the option of accepting or denying it. It would be nice if the rulings were clarified though.

Ok. Maybe buck did challenge, but the crew chief can look at that without a challenge. As long as the manager is out of challenges. While doing this, they can also overturn for other reasons.

Crew Chief Reviews. At any time during a game, a Crew Chief may, in his sole discretion, initiate a Replay Review of a potential home run call (as defined in Section V.A below) or of a call involving the application of Official Baseball Rule 7.13 ("Collisions At Home Plate"). Moreover, if a Crew Chief exercises his discretion to initiate Replay Review of a call involving the application of Official Baseball Rule 7.13, the Replay Official shall review any other reviewable call on the runner at home plate on that play (e.g., whether the runner was forced or tagged out at home plate even if Rule 7.13 was not violated). With respect to other reviewable calls (including calls at home plate in which the Crew Chief has not requested Replay Review of a potential Rule 7.13 violation), beginning in the seventh inning, a Crew Chief may, in his sole discretion, conduct Replay Review upon his own initiative or upon the request of a Manager who has no remaining Manager Challenges. These Replay Reviews are subject to the following:

A Club that has exhausted its Manager Challenges may request but cannot insist that the Crew Chief invoke his right to initiate Replay Review.

Except in the case of potential home run calls, the Crew Chief shall not initiate Replay Review of any play or call if the requesting Manager has a Manager Challenge remaining.

[El Gordo]

If the runner has possession of the ball and is blocking the plate (which he can do once he has the ball), the runner can collide with him as long as the runner does not change direction in order to initiate the collision.

For those who haven't read it, here's the rule.

I understand the rule. That's the problem with it. They are trying to have their collisions and avoid them too. It should be one or the other, the confusion comes from the grey area they left in.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Ok. Maybe buck did challenge, but the crew chief can look at that without a challenge. As long as the manager is out of challenges. While doing this, they can also overturn for other reasons.

Crew Chief Reviews. At any time during a game, a Crew Chief may, in his sole discretion, initiate a Replay Review of a potential home run call (as defined in Section V.A below) or of a call involving the application of Official Baseball Rule 7.13 ("Collisions At Home Plate"). Moreover, if a Crew Chief exercises his discretion to initiate Replay Review of a call involving the application of Official Baseball Rule 7.13, the Replay Official shall review any other reviewable call on the runner at home plate on that play (e.g., whether the runner was forced or tagged out at home plate even if Rule 7.13 was not violated). With respect to other reviewable calls (including calls at home plate in which the Crew Chief has not requested Replay Review of a potential Rule 7.13 violation), beginning in the seventh inning, a Crew Chief may, in his sole discretion, conduct Replay Review upon his own initiative or upon the request of a Manager who has no remaining Manager Challenges. These Replay Reviews are subject to the following:

A Club that has exhausted its Manager Challenges may request but cannot insist that the Crew Chief invoke his right to initiate Replay Review.

Except in the case of potential home run calls, the Crew Chief shall not initiate Replay Review of any play or call if the requesting Manager has a Manager Challenge remaining.

I think it was a request (not a formal challenge) and the umpire accommodated him (so, technically an umpire review) .....as they will almost every time. From what you have provided it does seem clear the umpire review is different than a formal challenge with a broader scope and that all aspects of the play were likely reviewed in this case. Great point, thanks.

[DrungoHazewood]

If they're going to take away the plate collisions and they can't agree on what constitutes "blocking the plate", then just make every play at home plate a force play.

Sure, if the rule they came up with needs a little tweaking, instead of doing that and fixing the problem let's instead be completely insane and totally change how plays between third and home happen in almost every instance.

I don't know why they didn't just issue a clarification that said "you know the rules about not colliding at all the other bases - well, that applies to home, too, like it always has and we just didn't enforce" and been done with it.

[DrungoHazewood]

You're wrong, Hazewood, and for some reason, you don't want to admit that the Merkel incident was a bad example of noting an obscure rule.

A baserunner is ruled out if he leaves the field voluntarily without touching whatever the next possible base that you could have potentially touched. If there is a force play at second base, third base, or home plate and you head leave the field without touching said base, then you are out. And, that is what happened with Merkel. It may not be called "running out of the baseline", but if you voluntarily leave the field for any reason while running the basepaths (and/or if the catcher drops a 3rd strike), then you are out.

Not if the game is over.

Whatever, we disagree, and I'm not even that convinced there was an absolutely right call in aught-eight, and it's not a big deal.

[Mondo Trasho]

Sure, if the rule they came up with needs a little tweaking, instead of doing that and fixing the problem let's instead be completely insane and totally change how plays between third and home happen in almost every instance.

I don't know why they didn't just issue a clarification that said "you know the rules about not colliding at all the other bases - well, that applies to home, too, like it always has and we just didn't enforce" and been done with it.

The problem is I don't think they can or ever will tweak it the way it needs to be.

[El Gordo]

The problem is I don't think they can or ever will tweak it the way it needs to be.

Change the rule to "If the runner runs into the catcher he is automatically out. If the catcher blocks the path to the plate with or without the ball the runner is safe. If the catcher is taken into the path of the runner in the act of catching the ball nether the catcher or the runner is at fault." How hard is that?

[DrungoHazewood]

Change the rule to "If the runner runs into the catcher he is automatically out. If the catcher blocks the path to the plate with or without the ball the runner is safe. If the catcher is taken into the path of the runner in the act of catching the ball nether the catcher or the runner is at fault." How hard is that?

Not hard at all. Really all they have to do is what I suggested a few posts ago, "Do what you do at all the other bases."

[El Gordo]

Not hard at all. Really all they have to do is what I suggested a few posts ago, "Do what you do at all the other bases."

Actually that's what the O's do. The catcher either makes a swipe tag or straddles the plate like a 2B/3B bag.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Not hard at all. Really all they have to do is what I suggested a few posts ago, "Do what you do at all the other bases."

They don't wear protective gear at all the other bases and I'm not even sure there us any rule against blocking the base at second/third if you have the ball. They probably don't do it for self preservation. I can recall Wigginton completely blocking third base several times with his knee/leg and not being called for anything. Then again, he was kind of a nut.

[Number5]

Not if the game is over.

Whatever, we disagree, and I'm not even that convinced there was an absolutely right call in aught-eight, and it's not a big deal.

It absolutely was the right call in 1908, or at any other time in baseball history. You are wrong on this one. The play is called "Merkel's boner" not "the umpire's boner." That an offensive player grabbed the ball and threw it into the stands to prevent Evers from making the play was an additional reason for an out to be called due to interference, although the runner that started at third, being closest to home, would be the runner that would be out if the umpires made the interference call. I have never, until now, heard anyone attempt to make the case that runners routinely failed to advance to the next base on a game-ending hit without being subject to being put out in 1908. Can you substantiate that in any way?

[DrungoHazewood]

They don't wear protective gear at all the other bases and I'm not even sure there us any rule against blocking the base at second/third if you have the ball. They probably don't do it for self preservation. I can recall Wigginton completely blocking third base several times with his knee/leg and not being called for anything. Then again, he was kind of a nut.

There's no rule about blocking the plate, or any other base, if you have the ball. The only clarification they need is "if you smash into the fielder who has the ball, you're out." Basically, if the ball gets there before the runner no amount of physical violence is going to make him safe, at all the bases.