Catcher was in the base path. clean play?
Yup.
Yup, at least as far as MLB rules go. Sucks for the catcher but he shouldn’t have been there in the first place without the ball.
Why would anyone think there was anything wrong with it? Because somebody got hurt? It happens. Sometimes baseball is a contact sport.
Sucks a little for both of them; the runner must feel bad, but he shouldn’t have to.
Coach is mad http://northcarolinastate.scout.com/2/973891.html
Too bad. Run counts. Ask Ray Fosse.
Ray Fosse’s a pretty bad analogy - that was an All-Star game. There’s a decent argument to be mad against Rose laying him out in a meaningless exhibition game. This collision, though, happened in the ACC Championship Series.
The coach in PSXer’s link says that “it was… avoidable.” It certainly was. If the fielder who didn’t have the ball hadn’t been blocking the basepath, it wouldn’t have happened.
Totally clean - the catcher clearly blocked the baseline and didn’t even have the ball.
And what does the ACC Championship Series “mean”?
All games are meaningless outside the context of the game; all games are meaningful within it. If you don’t want to win this game that you’re playing, here today, you don’t belong on the field at all.
The catcher was in the baseline without the ball. It’s a very hard but clean play.
Watching the replay, the runner (Ramsey) had his head down most of the way down the baseline, looking up only when he was ten or twelve feet from the catcher (Schaeffer) so I don’t think he was maliciously lining the guy up looking to hurt him. He’s entitled to the baseline and a fielder who blocks it without the ball is setting himself up for a hurtin’.
If anyone was in the wrong, it was actually the catcher. You’re not allowed to block the runner’s path when you’re not in possession of the ball.
It sucks that the catcher was injured, but it was a clean play.
ETA: according to Yahoo, “Adding insult to injury, plate umpire David Savage later told a pool reporter that Schaeffer was called for obstruction because he didn’t have the ball but was blocking the baseline.”
Baloney. Regular season and post-season games are meaningful in the context of the full season. The 1970 All Star game wasn’t. Unless you really think that winning the All Star game means as much to MLB players as winning the World Series?
I may have facilitated a misunderstanding by ambiguous use of the word “game.”
When I said “the game,” I meant the game of baseball, overall. When I said “games” and “this game,” I meant specific playings of the game.
No, I’m saying that the “meaning” of games is external to the logic and integrity of each day’s competition. If you take the field for a baseball game, respect for the game and the opponent demands that you try your utmost to win that game.
All baseball games, including the seventh game of the World Series, are meaningless to someone who doesn’t like or care about baseball; all baseball games, including exhibitions, are meaningful for someone who chooses to respect and embrace them.
Let me put it this way. Imagine the last series of the MLB regular season, between two teams long out of contention for playoff spots (we’ll call them the Nationals and the Mets). Nothing that happens in this series can possibly have any effect on the postseason and the championship. Yet we still expect them to show up, play the game, and try to win, right? Baseball fans would rightfully call it a travesty if they did not. It’s not the external “meaning” of that particular game that’s at stake–that’s known going in, and it’s nothing. It’s the “meaning” of baseball.
If you’re gonna play, you play to win. 
Clearly a clean play by the runner. There are, of course, other ways of handling this.
I remember seeing this on SportsCenter when it happened. I’ve always wondered why nobody ever tries that…
There is a thread discussing this play… from what I read, I believe it is illegal in High School and MLB, but legal in collegiate athletics…
Actually, I’d expect those 2 teams to do things that a playoff contention team wouldn’t - give some field time to their benchwarmers even if the game is close, bring up some minor league prospects and let them play, leave in a pitcher who’s getting shellacked, etc.
I’d also expect a team that’s clinched the division to play differently than one that’s a game and a half back from a playoff spot with 2 weeks to go. Saying you play every single game as if winning that game is the most important thing imaginable without regards to outside circumstances just isn’t true at the pro level. Not that you play to lose, but you modify your style of play based on the bigger picture.
While this call would be technically correct if the runner had subsequently been tagged out, the runner reached home safely, so obstruction shouldn’t have been invoked. It’s a conditional call.
Do you have kids? Do you ever play games against kids? Would you run over a 10 year old who was obstructing your path to win a family BBQ softball game?
Absolutely. The key element is whether the catcher had control of the ball. At 1:22, we see that he very clearly did not, as did the home plate umpire who was in perfect position for the call. At worst, this would have been an obstruction call; the runner is entitled to a clear path to the next base. Since the runner successfully achieved the base (home, in this case), the obstruction is rendered moot. It is not offensive interference, as the play concerns a thrown ball, rather than a batted ball.
Nobody ever said baseball wasn’t a non-contact sport. 