29 comments

  2. No, that’s football. And quoting Pete Rose on this, after he ended another player’s career with exactly this kind of illegal play, is a sign you’ve already lost the argument. They got rid of spiking players years ago, and it’s time for this to be done away with as well.

  3. Whose career did Rosé end? Is it legal for catchers to block the plate?

    And hitting in football is illegal now, too.

    Just saying.

  4. Ray Fosse was blocking home plate in the Al Star Game, when Mr Rose scored. Mr Fosse was blocking the plate, which was against the rules.

    Mr Fosse injured his shoulder on the play. The hit didn’t end his career, but he was never the same player after it, and was out of baseball soon enough.

    Like Mr Rose said, “Evidently the guys making all these rules never played the game of baseball.”

  5. Back in the day when I played ball, I played f’ing hard.
    But, I never approved of collisions at the plate unless it was a game winning play.

    It’s not allowed at the bases.
    I think it is one of baseball’s stupid traditions that should go away.

  6. If the catcher has the ball or is in the act of catching the ball, he has the right to the plate. Otherwise the runner is entitled to an unobstructed base path.

  10. If the catcher blocks the base path, catching a ball or not, he takes his chances. The runner also has a right to the base path.

  11. Kind of.
    Yes the catcher is always taking a chance but if the catcher has the ball, he has a right to protect the plate. The runner then is taking a chance.

  16. Rose’s play was not then nor now illegal. The proposed rule change is if the catcher has the ball, in which case he has the undisputed right to block the plate. Fosse did not have the ball when he blocked the plate, he was the one illegally obstructing the runner’s path.

  17. In the case of the catcher being “in the act” of catching the ball, there is always a split second where he must obstruct the plate before the ball arrives, in which case both have the right to be where they are under the rules. Does baseball propose to resolve this case always in favor of the catcher? It would have an effect on strategy, making it less productive to wave a runner home if it was going to be close.

  18. I agree with Rose. In fact, the benefits of the few significant rules changes are debatable.

    I strongly suspect the number of concussions in baseball are far more the result of incidents with the batter and those involving the runner at home are very rare. And both are far fewer than in football, soccer, rugby, and I believe even basketball.

  20. And I’m okay with that. If I want to watch a full-contact sport with occasional brawling, there’s always the NHL.

Comments are closed.