Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 1 of 2 pages
There's no good reason the game should turn into football as the runner is approaching home plate.
Other than 100 years of precedent.
What happens if the ball's direction and arrival time keeps the catcher from going "Ole!" and giving the runner a path? Think of the ending of "A League of Our Own". Kit shouldn't have to slide at the last second, Dottie is blocking the entire plate. And Dottie doesn't have time to move out of the way and give Kit a clear path. So what happens? By the new rule, I don't know what they would do, but with the rule change I gave, Kit would be out because she was tagged.
This doesn't actually eliminate collisions at home plate just like all the various rule changes in the NFL hasn't eliminated bone crushing hits. All that has simply happened here is that a player will now have to pay a fine or miss a game because he steamrolls a catcher on his way to creating a run or a catcher will have to pay a fine or a miss a game for standing in the way.
I won't miss it. I don't find the actual collision all that exciting or amusing. The tension as the runner comes home and the ball heads toward the plate -- will he score or will he be out -- is the heart of the action. Whichever way I'm rooting, the end result is what matters -- not the mechanics of a collision. And frankly, I find a deftly executed hook slide or grab of the plate, or acrobatic grab and tag, is a more aesthetically pleasing play than a collision.
I don't see how this is going to change a lot of things.
The Rockford Peaches got screwed!!!
That will be a long wait.
If all it changes is that it eliminates the play where a catcher posts up in front of home plate without the ball and stays there while the runner slams into him at full speed, I think it's a clear win for the game. I think it's a good move to try to get out of the concussion business and leave that to the more contact-intensive sports.
I'll probably be in the minority here, but not a fan of this. The collision at home plate is one of the most exciting plays in the game and despite the injury risk to the players I don't agree that outlawing it is a positive step forward for MLB.
Is it still legal to collide at lower levels of amateur ball? High school, little league, etc? If so, then MLB outlawing it will be a good first step towards seeing it outlawed in lower levels.
(The answer, of course, is "no", because the teams committed to the position switch. But it's interesting to contemplate whether the same decision would have been made had the rule change been announced earlier. Especially in Mauer's case, since part of the impetus behind moving Santana was that the guy was a bad defensive catcher anyway, but the Mauer move seemed to be entirely about protecting his health.)
If the players do not approve the rule change it will not go into effect in 2014, but MLB would be able to unilaterally implement it in 2015.
So will Joe Mauer and Carlos Santana be moved back to catcher now? :-)
(The answer, of course, is "no", because the teams committed to the position switch.
Can anybody explain this to me? It seems that if they have to get the players' approval, that it's subject to the CBA. But if it's not subject to the CBA, why can't they just unilaterally implement it now? What's the difference between implementing it now, as opposed to next year?
How does a catcher not have time to get out of the way? He sets up behind the plate. He has to intentionally get in the way in order to not have time to get out of the way.
Bottom line is that while the rule sounds good on paper, I'm not sure it won't have some unintended consequences.
Why would a catcher not be allowed to block the plate if he already has the ball? It happens all the time in rundowns. And every player not named Albert Belle tries to go around the guy with the ball.
That said given the way things are going there is no reason for MLB to sanction something that is likely to cause concussions and is in fact avoidable.
What are the "well known" injuries are home plate involving blocking? Maujer's is the only one that comes to mind.
If they can make a persuasive argument that the injury risk involved in blocking is such that it easily outweighs my two concerns about banning an exciting play
What are the high profile injuries at home plate involving blocking? Maujer's is the only one that comes to mind. IIRC Ventura suffered an ugly dislocation at home plate but that was on the type of collision that wouldn't be banned.
The injuries suck, but I kinda like Ronnie Lott videos too.
In football the violence is front and center, in baseball is lurks beneath the surface in the collision at home, the collision with the wall, the hit by pitch or come backer to the pitcher. I guess you could argue that violence (aka "collision sport", the nice euphemism football likes) isn't an inherent part of baseball and as much as possible should be discouraged.
Man, I just watched Ray's video and got a little pumped up. The injuries suck, but I kinda like Ronnie Lott videos too.
“What are they going to do next, you can’t break up a double play?” Pete Rose said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. “You’re not allowed to pitch inside. The hitters wear more armor than the Humvees in Afghanistan. Now you’re not allowed to be safe at home plate? What’s the game coming to? Evidently the guys making all these rules never played the game of baseball.”
Rose, banned for life in 1989 following a gambling investigation, famously bowled over catcher Ray Fosse in the 1970 All-Star game. Rose insists Fosse was blocking the plate without the ball, which is against the rules.
“Since 1869, baseball has been doing pretty well,” Rose said. “The only rules they ever changed was the mound (height) and the DH. I thought baseball was doing pretty good. Maybe I’m wrong about the attendance figures and the number of people going to ballgames.”
Awwwww, sociopath makes cute ...
Lou Marson was sent to the 15-day disabled list this year.
Baseball lost a huge amount of excitement when it banned the first baseman from hooking his fingers in the runners belt loops and keeping him at first. And I used to love it when the third baseman would trip the guy rounding third. Ole Anklebreaker Jones had mastered that technique and now they wont even allow him to do it. They took away a legimate skill. Pussies!
I like mike but as a player he was a little crazy. in a quiet way. if that makes sense
Since almost everyone is in favor of this, can I assume almost everyone would also like to see takeout slides eliminated also?
Breaking up double plays is an equally dangerous play
Breaking up double plays is an equally dangerous play, having the same "playing the game right" mentality, but resulting in needless injuries. How can it be legal to slide at a defender that is nowhere near the base?
It depends. If the fielder is still on the base when the runner arrives, I have not problem with a hard slide (as opposed to a rolling block) which disrupts the throw.
I think the DP situation is almost an unavoidable problem.
Why? Permit the runner to slide into the base, like they do for steals, and do not permit the runner to slide THROUGH or PAST the base to go barreling into the fielder especially when the runner knows he's already out. We all know when runners are careening through the base or out of the base line in order to attack the fielder. Sometimes they are actually even rolling through the bag. And this is not even like the catcher situation where catchers contribute to the problem by blocking the plate. No second baseman is "blocking" the base; he's simply trying to tag it. (Hell, with the neighborhood play he's not even on the base at all.)
I think at this point we should eliminate all touching of the opposing player in all sports so that no one gets hurt. I'm sure the Haphephobes among us will appreciate this.
1) No more neighborhood play, touch the base to get an out.
2) A baserunner must slide toward the base. A slide away toward a defender that is not on the base will result in an automatic double play call, and the baserunner is ejected (suspended?).
Yes. #1 makes me crazy. At first base every centimeter and microsecond count, at second base - hey he was within five feet of the bag with the ball, let's just call the runner out and move on with the game.
Allowing infielders to be close, but not demanding they be right on the bag, protects their legs, a situation first basemen don't have to worry about (barring something really bizarre happening).
Allowing infielders to be close, but not demanding they be right on the bag, protects their legs
Hopefully if you were to enact Prop 2: Ban the Takeout, then the neighbourhood play would immediately be irrelevant.
I don't take any joy in the takeout slide and will gladly trade it for a removal of the 'hood.
Obviously some people, like BM, get offended that the MI is not in direct contact with the bag at the time of the catch, and desperately want it changed. I always say it as one of the quirks of the game, a situation that makes life safer for the middle infielders without giving any kind of unfair advantage
The advantage is that the fielder gets to record an out without either tagging the runner or the base. The trade-off for safety may be worth it, but it is an advantage.
And it doesn't let you turn the DP quicker
It let's you turn DP's you otherwise wouldn't.
Unless you think guys would continue to catch the ball off the bag even though the umpire wasn't granting them the out, I don't think this is really true. If it's not letting you turn the DP quicker, then it's not letting you turn DPs you otherwise wouldn't. It will allow you to turn more of them, because you won't be on the DL.
C'mon, if the fielders do it there is probably a reason they do so. It allows them to avoid the runners more, which makes it more likely that their throws to first are made accurately and quickly. If they never used it, more throws would be made under duress, and fewer DP's would occur.
If it is universally allowed, it should be in the rules and specified. Also, it would have to be decided whether it was also allowed at other bases (for x-2-3 double plays, etc.).
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (9 members)
Page rendered in 1.1919 seconds, 58 querie(s) executed