Some more information here.
Does anyone have a sense of what the salient points of the “no collision” rule are likely to be? There’s not gonna be an automatic force play at home, is there?
(This thread from a couple of months ago, and the SI article it cited, didn’t have much in the way of details.)
Thanks!
damn they keep making baseball worse and worse
night games, the DH, instant replay, and now this
the pussification of the American male continues. can’t have people getting hurt
I don’t know how much longer I’m gonna be able to watch baseball if this keeps up
collisions at the plate are an integral part of the game you can’t take that away. knocking out the catcher is a legitimate strategy
sigh we are witnessing the downfall of western civilization right here folks
I just realized that asking if there will be an automatic force play at home was pretty silly of me.
I guess all they need to do is just say ‘the catcher can’t block the plate or impede the runner’ or something along those lines.
I’m guessing it’ll be 1) the catcher cannot block the plate and 2) the runner must slide into the plate, each on pain of being called out or tossed (depending on the egregiousness). So the catcher will need to do a swipe tag. I don’t think it will make anything automatic at home plate.
I’m in support of this rule change. Such actions are not allowed at any other base, and this isn’t football.
And helmets! Don’t forget the helmets, not to mention integration. They keep messing with baseball, why can’t it just be like it was?
… without the ball. If you have the ball the catcher can block the plate.
Basically, the rules will be the same as they are for any other base. You can’t interfere with the runner taking a base. You can’t go out of your way to make contact with a fielder. They don’t really need to even change the rules, as much as enforce the ones they have.
No they are not. They are kind of fun to see from a fan perspective, but there is nothing integral about them. And our minor entertainment value does not trump some else’s right not to be brain damaged.
I think you’re making a statement of the rules as they are now. chizzuk is suggesting how they might change. Or am I misunderstanding one or both of you?
Agreed.
Many of these collisions appear to have been generated by catchers blocking the plate without the ball. And that will no longer be allowed.
Yep. No need to change the rules, just start enforcing the ones that already exist.
It’s so barbaric to change games to protect players from death or grievous injury.
This rule should have been amended after the biggest asshole in baseball history, Pete Rose, creamed Ray Fosse in an exhibition game 43 years ago. Better late than never, I guess. Teams simply have too much money invested in these athletes to allow these violent collisions, not to mention the long-term health problems associated with concussions.
Actually, I’m good with this ruling. I’ve never really figured out how that was a fair play in the first place. It’s basically spiking the baseman without your spikes.
If not this rule change, they could have gone the other way and allowed the catcher to pick up a discarded bat to protect himself from these behemoths plowing him over when he’s not even looking. Or, hey, maybe they can allow the DH to pop out of the dugout and run up to block home plate like a full back. Make it fair, you know.
True, except adding a new, superfluous rule gives them the cover they need to change the actual way they officiate, without having to explain why they didn’t enforce a rule for so many years.
:golfclap:
They’ll probably do what they have done in high school since the late 1980s (and I think the NCAA does this now as well); the catcher cannot block the plate without the ball, and a runner cannot run into a fielder legally blocking home plate with the intent to knock the ball loose.
Unlike the second poster, I certainly don’t see intentional, bone-jarring collisions at the plate as being “an integral part of the game”. No, not in baseball. It actually happens relatively infrequently, and always seems out of character for the sport when it does happen. From a subjective standpoint, it’s usually fairly obvious when the catcher is blocking the plate, and also obvious when the runner is more intent on slamming into the catcher trying to dislodge the ball rather than tag the plate. How to write that into a rule will take some finesse, no doubt. But you can’t plow into anyone at any of the bases, so it isn’t that huge of a change.
The fact that Pete Rose is one of the first to talk to the press bemoaning the rule change is both expected and disgusting.
I’m happy about this (pending the specifics). Blocking the plate was never really legal anyway, and it’s finally going to be called that way. And because players are used to catchers blocking the plate, they would go out of their way to initiate contact with those catchers were weren’t even blocking the plate in the first place!
Home plate is not like any other base. You can’t overslide 2nd and 3rd, so you have to control yourself coming in. 1st is always a force out, so there is no blocking of the base happening.
I also think that it is an integral part of the sport that if the catcher is going to use his body in an attempt to prevent you from reaching the base, then it is fair game to knock him out of the way. If he doesn’t want to get hit, simply take a position similar to a shortstop or second baseman on a steal attempt. Oh that’s bad? Why? Because the catcher wants to use his body to shield the runner from the plate.
It’s really unfair to the runner to not allow him to make contact with some 250lb catcher, complete with gear, is blocking the entire 17 inch wide plate, with or without the ball. Might as well make it a force out.
1973
I’m going to go out a limb and put it at a 0% chance you’ve ever seen a live game of professional American baseball where these weren’t allowed in the league.
So I’m also putting it at 100% chance you’re being hyperbolic, joking, or…well, something else belonging to the pit.