Cleveland Guardians

CatAlum said:
I haven't seen a video of the Padres' play, but I've seen a photo. Looks like the catcher may have blocked the plate while ALSO possessing the ball. That's permitted. What's not permitted (under the revised rule) is blocking the plate WITHOUT the ball.

I watched Hedges' play from several days ago. It's certainly "textbook" what I was taught when I played catcher. However, he IS blocking the plate WITHOUT the ball and the runner IS being denied access to the plate. Seems to me that the rule needs to be sent to some lawyers to nuance and rewrite it.
Click to expand...
I thought the old rule was you had to have the ball to block the plate.

Because if not, you could fake taking a throw, and cause injury to the runner.

With the new rule, I think you have to give the runner a path to the plate, which the Padres catcher did not do at all.

Watch the replay if you can, let me know what you think.
 
OldSoulon said:
I thought the old rule was you had to have the ball to block the plate.

Because if not, you could fake taking a throw, and cause injury to the runner.

With the new rule, I think you have to give the runner a path to the plate, which the Padres catcher did not do at all.

Watch the replay if you can, let me know what you think.
Click to expand...
If you have the ball, I believe the rule is, at always has been, that you're entitled to block the plate.
 
"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. "
 
But...it's complicated...

"Notwithstanding the above, it shall not be considered a violation of this Rule 6.01(i)(2) (Rule 7.13(2)) if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in a legitimate attempt to field the throw (e.g., in reaction to the direction, trajectory or the hop of the incoming throw, or in reaction to a throw that originates from a pitcher or drawn-in infielder). In addition, a catcher without possession of the ball shall not be adjudged to violate this Rule 6.01(i)(2) (Rule 7.13(2)) if the runner could have avoided the collision with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) by sliding."
 
CatAlum said:
But...it's complicated...

"Notwithstanding the above, it shall not be considered a violation of this Rule 6.01(i)(2) (Rule 7.13(2)) if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in a legitimate attempt to field the throw (e.g., in reaction to the direction, trajectory or the hop of the incoming throw, or in reaction to a throw that originates from a pitcher or drawn-in infielder). In addition, a catcher without possession of the ball shall not be adjudged to violate this Rule 6.01(i)(2) (Rule 7.13(2)) if the runner could have avoided the collision with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) by sliding."
Click to expand...
So based on the last sentence there, it was a bad call in the game where it went against the Tribe.
 
OldSoulon said:
So based on the last sentence there, it was a bad call in the game where it went against the Tribe.
Click to expand...
I don't know...I watched it several times. I think the problem with the rule...and what Hedges did...is that he totally blocked the plate BEFORE he had the ball AND the guy was coming in, sliding, head first and had to reach around him to get at the plate. I think, though, that had Hedges given him the outside 10% of the plate (and I think he gave him 0%) that I think he would have tagged him out. I totally understand why Hedges was PO-ed. I thought it was great technique by a catcher
 
key phrase: "in the judgement of the umpire". Was Hedges lining up where he had to in order to field the throw when he blocked the plate? Maybe. Apparently the ump did not think so.
 
wolves82 said:
key phrase: "in the judgement of the umpire". Was Hedges lining up where he had to in order to field the throw when he blocked the plate? Maybe. Apparently the ump did not think so.
Click to expand...
I think the ump called the runner out, then NY overturned it.

The runner had plenty of room to get to the plate.
 
OldSoulon said:
If this team wins the division, how could he not be MLB Manager of the Year?
Click to expand...
I'm sure Boone will get it. I mean, ALL of that pressure in NY and ONLY having the 3rd highest payroll in MLB. He's a miracle worker. If Tito does win it, Brian should be permanently banned from posting on the baseball thread.
 
brian1227 said:
Big series tito is failing.what he done since 2016.
Click to expand...
Dear moron,
Please explain specifically what Tito has failed at in these 2 games in Seattle. His closer, who has been lights-out all year, finally was human and gave up a game. Should he have not used Clase? Perhaps Tito should have swung the bat better these last two games?

Seriously, get a grip. Team is doing fine and Tito is manager of the year in the MLB. His roster has two position players (Ramirez and Giminez) that would start in Seattle.
 
wolves82 said:
Dear moron,
Please explain specifically what Tito has failed at in these 2 games in Seattle. His closer, who has been lights-out all year, finally was human and gave up a game. Should he have not used Clase? Perhaps Tito should have swung the bat better these last two games?

Seriously, get a grip. Team is doing fine and Tito is manager of the year in the MLB. His roster has two position players (Ramirez and Giminez) that would start in Seattle.
Click to expand...
Kwan?
 
wolves82 said:
Dear moron,
Please explain specifically what Tito has failed at in these 2 games in Seattle. His closer, who has been lights-out all year, finally was human and gave up a game. Should he have not used Clase? Perhaps Tito should have swung the bat better these last two games?

Seriously, get a grip. Team is doing fine and Tito is manager of the year in the MLB. His roster has two position players (Ramirez and Giminez) that would start in Seattle.
Click to expand...
Hey, he may be an idiot, but he’s from my village. Cut him some slack
 
mcm.1019 said:
I haven't figured out if you believe the stuff you post of if you're just trying to be funny...but you do realize Seattle actually has a better record than Cleveland, right?
Click to expand...
And as another poster pointed out, starter-for-starter, maybe 3 of ours could displace theirs on the same team, right ? We have holes that are easy to miss when we play Detroit....

Seattle made deadline moves that we did not, too. I'll absolve Tito. It's always the Dolans.

Brian just wants to let the team know he is disappointed, and that they must try harder.
 
Guess what, sometimes you lose 3 of 4 when the bats go to sleep. In baseball, the very worst team will beat the very best team 3 or 4 out of 10 games.

Calling this team's performance "unacceptable" or "disappointing" shows a real lack of understanding about baseball. This roster has no business being in first place and having almost 70% chance of making the playoffs as of today. They are playing very well.
 
saw a stat at lunch: in the 10 years since Tito took over managerial duties for Cleveland, he has a .554 winning percentage...that is the 2nd best mark in the AL, trailing only the Yankees...compare those payrolls and tell me Tito isn't a damn good manager!
 
Last edited:
mcm.1019 said:
saw a stat at lunch: in the 10 years since Tito took over managerial duties for Cleveland, he has a .554 winning percentage...that is the 2nd best mark in the AL, trailing only the Yankees...compare those payrolls and tell me Tito isn't a damn good manager!
Click to expand...
2 best is first loser.fire tito
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top