Hey ESPN - ever hear of this rule?

[WillyM]

In Sunday night's Phillies-Braves game, the  Phillies' Alec Bohm was on third base with one out in the top of the ninth, score tied, 6-6.

Didi Gregorius lofted a fly ball to shallow left, near the line.  The left fielder made the catch and Bohm started for home.  The left fielder's throw was wide to the foul side of the plate, so the catcher had to move away from the plate to take the throw, then lunge back to his right to try to make the tag.  As he lunged to his right, his knee pad came down in front of the plate, deflecting Bohm's foot away from his slide path.  Bohm continued to slide, and though he slid far enough to reach the plate before the tag was applied, it was hard to see whether his foot actually touched the edge of plate or missed it by a half-inch or so.

The ESPN announcers started to question whether Bohm's foot had actually touched the plate.  The play was given a replay review, and Bohm was ruled safe.  The announcers kept focusing on where Bohm's foot had been and said it was very difficult to tell from any of the replays that were shown whether he had touched the plate or not.

At no time did they mention the obvious (at least it seemed obvious to me) fact that the catcher had blocked the plate.  The rule against catchers blocking the plate has been in effect for several years.  The catcher must give the runner a clear path to the plate.  If he doesn't, the runner is safe.  It shouldn't have made a bit of difference whether Bohm had touched the plate or not - he was safe under the blocking the plate rule.

I tuned in to MASN Monday night, not realizing that the Orioles' game had been called.  Since there was no Oriole game, they were showing ESPN News.  The ESPN commentators were ranting about the previous night's play at the plate.  Evidently a replay angle had eventually been found showing that Bohm's foot did not touch the plate, and the commentators were ranting and raving that Bohm should have been called out, and a terrible injustice had been done to the Braves, and how could such a thing possibly happen with all the replay technology that exists nowadays.  And on and on they ranted, without ever mentioning that the catcher had blocked the plate.

Last night, after the Orioles' doubleheader concluded, I tuned in to ESPN to catch the end of the Phillies-Mets game.  Bohm came up to bat, and the ESPN announcers started in again on Sunday night's play, still insisting that Bohm should have been called out, still calling for MLB to do something to correct the terrible mistake that was made, and still never mentioning that the catcher had blocked the plate.

Maybe I'm just dreaming that a rule like this exists.  If it really does exist, I would think the home plate umpire could simply let it be known that his safe call was based on the rule, and maybe ESPN would shut up about it.

[Frobby]

A catcher can block the plate once he has possession of the ball. Just not before.  Here is the full text of Rule 7.13(2):

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.

[WillyM]

OK, if that's the rule, then Atlanta had a legitimate beef.  Although his hands were not in a position where he could tag the runner, the catcher did have possession of the ball when Bohm made contact with his knee pad.

I thought he had to be in position to tag the runner, but the rule doesn't say that.