Jump to content

Sox @ Gigantes pt. deux


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 13, 2014 -> 04:47 PM)
Farmer is just losing his s***. I can't imagine Hawk is any worse than this right now.

 

Hawk is actually pretty composed. He isn't happy about it, but he isn't going crazy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 13, 2014 -> 04:47 PM)
Farmer is just losing his s***. I can't imagine Hawk is any worse than this right now.

 

Hawk said he wishes he could cuss and the rule is ridiculous. Also need 4 impartial people in NY and not umpires

Edited by BigHurt3515
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLB is embarrassing themselves with this rule and interpretation.

 

In high school baseball, I can tell you that it's not obstruction in the slightest. Easily had the ball before a slide was even starting. If it can't be obstruction in high school baseball, there's no way it could be so in MLB. He was not scoring, or even close to scoring, if Flowers wasn't there.

 

That's not blocking the pathway.

 

Here's the part of the rule:

 

"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."

 

Had ball, didn't block pathway before having the ball - or at least to the point where he had to slide or deviate. How far do you take this? Guy rounds third, and you're blocking the pathway at that point, out by 40 feet...well, you were blocking the pathway at some given point.

 

They've gone so safe on this rule due to not wanting collisions. This isn't hard. You use the high school rule for obstruction. It's either a badly written rule, they are instructed to have terrible interpretation, or both.

 

Flowers foot in the pathway had zero effect on that play. Had he been starting his slide or mid-slide and he still didn't have the ball but had a foot there, then you call the obstruction.

 

That was just brutal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Aug 13, 2014 -> 05:47 PM)
Only difference is Posey was farther up the line by a foot or so.. Both had their foot in the baseline though

Only difference is the throw to posey was from a different angle, that's why posey was a lil off

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Aug 13, 2014 -> 04:50 PM)
Shouldn't blocking the plate be an error on the catcher?

 

No, the throw home is a fielders choice, and you can't assume an out. It was the same under the old rule if a runner smashed a catcher and knocked the ball out, it was a hit/FC and RBI, no error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Aug 13, 2014 -> 05:43 PM)
Completely agree Hawk. It's just not baseball.

 

I think Hawk is embarrassing himself. I'm not referring to this particular tag play

 

The difference between "the good old days" and today is that medical science knows a lot more about the longterm effects of concussions on the brain. There's, you know, a lot of guys committing suicide because of it.

 

He said (paraphrasing) "what, are they gonna turn football into a girls' game?" He said that out loud and it was broadcast on TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (JoshPR @ Aug 13, 2014 -> 04:51 PM)
Only difference is the throw to posey was from a different angle, that's why posey was a lil off

 

Well yeah that is why they were in different positions.. I just don't see how they can call him safe unless he would have been safe if the catcher isn't blocking the plate. It is a stupid rule

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...