Major League Baseball and the Major League Baseball Players Association announced today that they have agreed to implement an experimental rule that is designed to eliminate "most egregious collisions at home plate." The official language of the rule, per the press release, is as follows:
- "A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate). If, in the judgment of the Umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) in such a manner, the Umpire shall declare the runner out (even if the player covering home plate loses possession of the ball).
- 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."
The rule, numbered Rule 7.13, does not bar players from colliding with a catcher if the ball is already clearly in the catcher's possession by the time the runner reaches home plate. Factors in determining whether or not a runner violated the rule will be whether or not he made an effort to touch home plate, lowered his shoulders or pushed through the catcher leading with his hands, elbows or arms. Runners who slide and catchers who leave a path for the runner to get to the plate will not be found in violation of the rule.
MLB and the MLBPA will form a committee of players and managers to review the rule as the season progresses, with an eye on full-time implementation for the 2015 season. Rule 7.13 plays will be reviewable under expanded instant replay.
“Where was this rule three years ago?!” – Buster Posey
It was in place Buster. It was against the rules to blog the bag at any base. If it was ENFORCED back then, YOU would have been breaking it by blocking the plate before the ball arrived. The runner would have been safe (still, since you dropped the ball then) and you STILL would have been hurt.
We’ll at least they aren’t completley getting rid of collisions.
Home plate collisions are an issue that needs to be addressed but this rule just complicates and confuses the issue. Either ban them or don’t, this is just going to lead to more controversies over calls.
I don’t see the problem with it. If the guy has the ball you’re out unless you can slide beside him.
If you’re a catcher and you are blocking the plate you will only risk hurting yourself unless you get the ball before the runner gets to you.
The rule does not state “the guy has the ball you’re out unless you can slide beside him. If you’re a catcher and you are blocking the plate you will only risk hurting yourself unless you get the ball before the runner gets to you.”
It says if the catcher has the ball and is in the way the runner can hit him full force but if the catcher isn’t in the way the runner cant hit him, also if the catcher doesn’t have the ball he can’t get in the way of the runner.
That’s way too many conditional factors, just ban collision or don’t.
essentially the same as what it is at every other base. contact when sliding into second or third are not against the rules. now it’s the same at home.
Its ALWAYS been the same at every bag. At home plate it simply has not been enforced.
NO! You can still run over him. You cant lower your shoulder or put your hands or elbow out to try to dislodge the ball. SO if you simply run over him and he drops the ball you are safe.
This rule only happened because of Posey… this isn’t going to go over well…
Another, very similar situation happened to Carlos Santana in August 2010, and ended his season. I believe he tore his ACL in his knee.
Yadier’s gotten blown up a fair number of times in that same span, too. And there was Nyjer Morgan’s repeated targeting in his last year with Washington.
The real reason this rule happened is League of Denial. MLB doesn’t want to give players reason to sue (see also: approved headgear for pitchers).
Excellent example of a catcher blocking the plate incorrectly.
Weird… I posted this comment earlier and it’s not showing up now. I’ll repost it (Sorry for a double post if it posts twice).
There are plenty of catchers who have been hurt because of collisions at the plate. Go on MLB’s website right now and search for Lou Marson and watch the first clip. I believe this rule would make it illegal for Marson to have blocked the plate. Under the old rule, he would be forced to block the plate and put himself in essentially a “defeseless receiver” position (to borrow a term from football). Under the new rule, as far as I understand it, Marson would have to give the path to the plate to the runner and stand next to homeplate to receive the throw. The runner would not be allowed to hit him (thereby protecting him) and would encourage Marson to put down a tag instead of putting himself in that position.
BTW, I believe that was the last MLB game Marson played, as it was a long road to recovery, which gave Yan Gomes the shot he needed to not only win the backup catcher’s job, but to take over the primary catcher’s job. Marson signed a minor league deal with the Phillies.
3 catchers last season went on the DL due to home plate collisions. How many players went on the DL for head first slides at any bag? LOTS more.
Under the Old rule at ANY bag, if you block the bag or plate without the ball the runner is safe by way of obstruction. That has never been enforced at home plate. If they ENFORCED the old rule at home plate, none of this would be necessary.
“How many players went on the DL for head first slides at any bag? LOTS more.”
$20 says this rule leads to a spike in concussions due to runners sliding head first to the side of the bag to try to get around the catcher.
I would bet you are right about that.
God forbid one of the game’s best young players be spared needlessly injury from an avoidable collision. Posey wasn’t even blocking the plate when Cousins intentionally ran him over without even trying to touch the plate.
Runners aren’t allowed to charge through defenders or knock the ball out of a defender’s glove at any other base, so why should home plate be different? It shouldn’t. Sometimes collisions happen by accident, but those won’t include lowering a shoulder to knock the ball out or knock the catcher out.
100% agree. It has always bothered me that the home plate collision is the one play where baseball stops being baseball and turns into football. It is completely inconsistent with the rest of the sport.
If the old rules had been enforced, Posey would not have been able to block the plate without the ball and he wouldnt have been injured by a player legally running into him. That hit will STILL be legal, because Posey blocked the plate prior to the arrival of the ball.
Horrible rule, there will be no more plays at the plate, collision or otherwise, if the catcher can’t block it while waiting for the ball.
Blocking the plate without the ball has always been against the rules. It’s just never been enforced.
Also, plays at the plate are stupid. If you want to watch people hit each other, go watch football or hockey where they actually wear pads.
I’m just glad we aren’t going to have any more exciting plays at home. All we have to do now is mandate that all hitters walk around the bases, all throws from infielders are underhanded, and all pitchers wait at least 15 seconds between pitches.
Why don’t we go the other way and get rid of force plays at all bases and require the runner to dislodge the ball to be safe? Baseball isn’t about physical contact between players. The play at the plate should be determined by whether or not the ball beats the player and the catcher makes the tag. That’s baseball.
If you want to talk about what’s baseball and what isn’t there’s about 100 years of history you can look into… during all of which collisions were legal. You’ll find the instances of a player being gravely injured are few and far between. This isn’t just about whether the ball beats the tag, it’s about everyone second-guessing whether or not a play should occur at all, it’s about forcing hesitation into a slow paced game. It will impact not just the players, but the third base coach, who’s primary job is to make split second decisions on whether or not a runner should go. Now he has a much bigger reason not to send the runner at all. This will have an impact on how games play out and the net result will be a game that is more frustrating to watch.
I think the reason there aren’t more injuries is that collisions are actually pretty rare. They don’t happen once per game. Maybe once per three or four games. That’s why I say they aren’t what baseball is about. Close plays at the plate will still be exciting, but if you watch baseball specifically because a guy might slam into another guy I think it’s not the sport for you.
Hockey. Now that’s a sport with some slamming. And there’s almost always punching to go with it. In fact I would wager there is more fist fighting in hockey than collisions in baseball.
Yea i see what you’re saying. But I mean, no one watches baseball for the contact. That’s silly. It’s not a thing… But yes, this is definitely something that rarely occurs. What they’ve done is taken something that almost never happens and broadened it into a situation open to interpretation to umpires (ugh). is that really a good thing? since it rarely occurs anyway, the net result in player safety is minimal. all we’ve done is given the umpires something extra to mess up.
That’s why I’m against this. It’s not as base as wanting to watch ‘some slamming’ so everyone needs to stop pretending it is. there’s a much deeper impact that this will have in how the sport plays out. i mean, it’s definitely not the end of the world, but its going to create a lot more aggravating situations than it should. all in the name of something we both agree almost never happens.
Rules aren’t made just for things that happen everyday, every game. They are the structure for the game, to make fewer things subjective and up to interpretation by the umpires, and to protect personnel, fans and property.
In this case, it is an enormous tragedy if even ONE player is seriously hurt, if a career is ended, because MLB couldn’t be bothered to work toward a rule that makes sense for game play.
I am 100% sure that this will (if it is not already) be added to the list of things that can be reviewed – so they will have a mechanism to get it right.
Furthermore, this is supported by the union and MLB, so I can’t see the harm. Sometimes you have to legislate not for the common, but instead the exceptional.
With this rule its totally in the interpretation of the umpire.
…the point is that if it is a rule that gets enforced, the dangerous behaviors of the players might decrease. They are attempting to change the culture of play – if it will encourage people not to push it to score a run, fewer runners will attempt to mow down the catcher to pop loose the ball or catchers to block the plate and expose themselves to harm.
A lot of players say that they feel a NEED to do it, there is a pressure from the team, the manager, their peers to do it so they can be seen as aggressive player, to make an impression, to play 110%. But there is a cultural mismatch between the old school tough guy and the financial asset that players are now — where players are getting paid hundreds of millions, and running into a wall or blowing out your knee or exposing yourself to post-concussion syndrome will hurt the business of baseball as well as the players.
3 that resulted in a trip to the DL last season.
It’s almost like scoring from third should require some sort of skill instead of just depending on how hard a player can throw an arm shiver.
Yes. Because before this rule was implemented baseball was a rough contact sport filled with explosive high-impact colisions and large numbers of players being carted off the field.
Ausmus, who actually played baseball, said collisions only occur about once or twice a year to a catcher and are rarely a serious matter.
It’s almost like home plate collisions are drastically out of line with how the entire rest of the sport is conducted.
Catchers getting their knees pointlessly shredded and their bells rung is bad for the sport. I’d rather watch good catchers catch than minor league journeymen.
As for Ausumus, first of all, perspective bias. Second of all, even if he’s right, removing that “once or twice” a year per catcher means the collisions won’t be missed anyway. And finally, rarely doesn’t mean never. Sometimes it’s a serious matter. And it’s entirely and blatantly preventable. So prevent it from being serious.
I get that, but my main point, that I elaborated on in a separate reply above is that the net effect of this rule has next to no impact on player safety (since its an incident that rarely occurs) and broadens it into a brand new situation in which the umpires are trusted entirely with correctly interpreting what happened. It will decrease the number of plays that occur at home and increase the number of maddening umpire calls. I’m all for player safety, but players are rarely hurt on this play and the play itself almost never happens, so you therefore can’t argue it’s going to impact player safety on a meaningful level in terms of everyday baseball.
What this does do is it puts the umpire’s discretion into a big area of the game where it wasn’t before. That’s not an improvement.
Again, rarely does not equal never. There are immediate consequences for when these collisions go wrong, and long term consequences for players who suffer multiple concussions.
Umpires are given discretion on takeout slides and have interpreted the rule in such a way that means they basically never enforce obstruction or interference on a double play ball. And while players rarely get hurt on such plays (mostly because of the neighborhood rule), sometimes they still do. And when they do, it’s not fun for anyone. Many players will tell you that it’s “part of the game.” But as we can see in the NFL right now, players cannot and should not be trusted to protect themselves.
Umpire discretion will be largely a non-factor. Players will be instructed to take the open lane and not leave their basepath to hit catchers, or make a show of trying to dislodge the ball. Catchers will be instructed to leave a lane for the player unless they have the ball (which is the case at literally every other base). So you’re taking an already infrequent occurrence and further limiting it. The situations where you will see umpire discretion are a fraction of those remaining incidents. Non-issue.
This is baseball. Umpire discretion is always a factor. And, no if umpires are allowed to intepret the situation then it will not be a fraction of the plays, it will be all of the plays, plus close plays, plus non-plays. The entire situation and anything close to it is now open for the umpire to impact.
For all the griping about umpiring, they get the vast majority of the close calls right right. And if they aren’t already, plays at the plate will be subject to replay as well, and it’s only a matter of time until the asinine challenge system is dispensed with as well for always-on replay. I repeat: non-issue.
I hope you’re right. I’ll see how the season plays out, first, but I’ll respectfully disagree about the umpiring for the time being. I’m just not sold they can handle it. If they end doing ok with the whole thing then I won’t care either way.
One thing, though: I did forget that they changed the replay system entirely until you mentioned replay, so they should be able to get more replay calls correct this yr at least. Hopefully that helps. I watched two games last season where they stopped, reviewed the call, and still got it wrong.
I guess there are no exciting plays at any other base where runners are required to slide instead of running over a defender in an attempt to knock the ball out.
Yup. Exactly what I said.
Maybe brute force shouldn’t determine a safe/out call. Maybe instead the two players could just stop and calmly debate the merits of the their side of the argument. I mean, seriously – there’s an umpire RIGHT THERE! He can moderate and make his decision after each player presents his case, has an opportunity for rebuttal and makes a closing statement. And if you don’t think a debate can be incredibly exciting and dramatic – hoo boy! – you just don’t know what you’re missing!
Or we can just have baseball without the extremely dangerous and totally unnecessary collisions.
We basically already do, though. Collisions rarely occur and are unlikely to end in serious injury. Serious injuries do happen, but occur much, much less frequently than batters getting plunked, for instance.
Nonsense. Every other level of baseball has plays at the plate without the catcher being blown up. It’s still an exciting and fun play with a tag and slide rule.
This is a good first cut at the rule. It establishes an obligation on the part of both players to avoid collision and gives the umpire the authority to rule the player out or safe based on adherence to the rule. Rules like this always sound more complicated than they are. In practice, a player that goes to hit the catcher instead of trying to touch the plate will be ruled out, eliminating the collision as a valid strategy. Only if the catcher has the ball and leaves no other way to score will a collision occur.
Which means it probably doesn’t go far enough because catchers will still feel obligated to block the plate if they have the ball. In the Buster Posey play, he actually drops the ball, but it got there first. He wasn’t fully blocking the plate, however. If the runner had slid around him, he would have been safe. Instead he lowered a shoulder in a move to the inside of the base path and nailed Posey. Under this rule he would have been out. I think with this rule Posey does the same thing (tries to catch the ball and block the plate enough to make a tag) but the runner would try to slide to the base. If there was a collision it would have been far less likely to cause injury.
If the runner had slid around Posey, with the new rule he would have been out for leaving the line to the plate.
In the new rule he would not have been out for hitting Posey, since Posey was blocking the plate BEFORE he got the ball and then dropped it. If the runner had done the same thing he did he would ahve been safe because Posey blocked the plate without the ball.
When cousins was 30feet from home posey moved a foot in front of home plate. Where are you getting he was blocking the plate ?
I think he’d have been safe if he slides because Posey blocked the plate without the ball. I think he had room to slide inside the base path anyway. He had to take a step to the left to hit him. Which is why I think he’d be called out. Posey gave room to slide. If not they both did wrong so I don’t know who gets the call.
I wonder what Mike Scioscia had to say about this. If anyone knows about home plate collisions it’s him. As far as I know, he’s the only catcher ever to be knocked out at the plate and still hold the ball in his hand for the out.
Honestly based on Scioscia’s Dec 2013 comment, included below, I’d bet Scioscia wrote this rule.
“I think everyone is in agreement that the mindless collisions at home plate where a catcher is being targeted by a runner, that needs to be addressed. I think it’s easy to say a runner has to slide, but the other side of the coin, it’s going to be difficult to contain a runner — telling him what he has to do and let the catcher have carte blanche to be able to block the plate aggressively. And there will have to be some parameters around the catcher. It’s a little bit of a dicey issue to work your way through, but I’m comfortable in the feeling that it will be addressed and addressed to a satisfactory level, where a runner can still be aggressive going to the plate with a hard slide and the catcher understands the need to have the ball in his possession and what he can do to tag a guy at the plate.”
There seems to be 2 rules contained in the 1st paragraph – The first rule is to make the runner stay on his path towards home plate to avoid creating contact – my question is “can the runner be called out for deviating from his path, whether or not there is a play at the plate?”. The second rule seems to be to keep the runner from initiating contact. The problem with combining the first part with the second is to determine whether a runner deviates (intentionally) from his path means the ump would need to be behind the catcher looking towards 3rd – that’s a bad viewpoint to make a call on a close tag, and judging how contact is initiated can be subjective. This will be interesting to the first time these rules are put to the test.
Umpire at 3B can see if runner is not on line to home plate. No change there
The rule specifies that deviating from the baseline for the purpose of creating a collision is illegal. Your routine, run-of-the-mill base-running outside the basepath on a non-play, or even on a play to evade a tag is still very much legal. The runner, upon leaving the baseline, can no longer barrel into the catcher. That’s literally the only change.
Just like in the NFL, if players were just trying to make plays instead of trying to end someone’s life, rules like this wouldn’t be necessary.
Looks like a good rule. Bans all collisions except for when actually necessary.
Quick question, hope someone has a good answer: When an outfielder throws a one-hopper in to the catcher; can a catcher block the plate with the anticipation that the ball will be there before contact is made?
I don’t think so. I think that falls under the spirit of the rule – they don’t want catchers to be in a dangerous situation. Think about football’s defenseless receiver penalty. I think this is pretty similar. The catcher can only block the plate if they have the ball. I think if it’s a bang-bang play (i.e. the catcher has to catch the ball and immediately the runner hits him) then he should not be standing where he is standing in the first place. If the ball and the runner are getting to the plate at the same time, then the catcher has to give the runner a clear path to the plate.
I could be wrong though.
For a really good example, go to mlb and search for Lou Marson under videos. There was a play where a ground ball to third was fielded and thrown home. Marson caught it and had the ball before the runner got home, but it was bang-bang, and Marson was hit hard (he held onto the ball) but he hit his head and suffered a pretty nasty concussion and hasn’t played in the MLB since. This is the case you describe – Marson was blocking home plate with the anticipation that the ball would be there, which it was – but it led to a very nasty collision. I think the new rule disallows this, which is good to protect catchers from being hit without having the chance to brace themselves first.
Hope that helps, if I’m wrong someone should correct me.
No. The runner is safe in that situation.
What if the catcher blocks the plate AND the runner plows him over. Which side of the rule wins?
If the catcher has the ball and blocks the plate, the runner just hits him full force and the same old hold on to the ball rule applies. This rule just tries to limit when you can hit the catcher and when the catcher can block the plate.
The rule will definitely require umpire discretion and will likely bring up a few extra arguments over the course of the season. So if a collision occurs the umpire will have to ask himself the following:
1) Did player aim for the plate or the catcher. If he aimed for the catcher then he’s out, if not then,
2) When blocking did the catcher have the ball at the time. If yes then the player is out.
So to answer your question if the catcher is in a blocking position rather than a receiving position without the ball and the player runs him over in effort to score then the player will be safe.
If he is blocking the plate, he is automatically in the base path.
It doesnt ban the runner bowling the catcher over. It bans lowering your shoulder or putting your hands out. So no, the runner is not out.
Go re-read the rule please.
If the catcher blocks the plate and doesnt have the ball the runner is safe. Same as obstruction call at any base. If the catcher blocks the plate and does have the ball the runner can bowl him over same as at any bag.
Honestly I thought this was how things were already supposed to work. If you’re not making a play with the ball, as the catcher you can’t impede the baserunner and as a baserunner you can’t interfere with the catcher. Makes a lot of sense.
I wonder if this would this be a reviewable call?
It will be
Someone is going to round third, second-guess himself thanks to this rule, try to stop short of contact and wreck an ankle or break a leg. I’d be shocked if it doesn’t happen in spring training. Yay, safety.
Why would that happen? It never happens rounding first or rounding second, where fielders cannot block the bag without the ball and runners cannot blow up the fielders.
You cant block the runner at any bag. Its called obstruction and the runner is safe. You CAN run over the position player at any other base if they get in the basepath, but you cant raise an elbow or hands up. How is this different? Its not. NOTHING has changed.
If you are a fielder and have the ball, you can block the basepath. You’re entitled to make a play on the runner. The same is true at home plate (and has always been true, just never enforced).
Better go read the rules. They runner can go right through you to get to the bag if you block the bag with the ball. If he does and you drop the ball, the runner is safe.
If you DONT have the ball and blcok the path to the bag, the runner is ruled safe by obstruction. That is also the rule at home plate. Always has been.
Rule 2.00: “OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner.”
And:
“Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play.”
That’s why A-Rod was called out for runner interference when he tried to slap a ball out of Bronson Arroyo’s glove.
“According to Section 6.1 of the MLB Umpire Manual, ‘While contact may occur between a fielder and runner during a tag attempt, a runner is not allowed to use his hands or arms to commit an obviously malicious or unsportsmanlike act.'”
A fielder with the ball (or even while receiving a throw, as he is BY RULE in the act of fielding the ball) is entitled to occupy the basepath to make a tag attempt; the onus is on the runner to avoid being tagged.
Thanks for playing.
If the runner passes 3/4 the way point down the Line before the Catcher has 100% control / possession of the Ball..the Run should be deemed scored.
1. it will eliminate injures at the plate.
2. Reduce the need for pinch runners
3. Slower Runners will Score more runs thus increasing their War and Contract size
4. Higher Scoring Games
5. Frustrate more Fans thus increasing Food & Alcohol sales .
Balls need to have Red Polka Dot’s for better visual on instant replays.
Thanks Buster Posey for ruining it for everybody.Buster (Future First baseman) Posey is the reason this happen.
While Posey was the most recognizable case of a catcher getting injured they’re have been plenty of catchers with concussions from collisions over the last several years. Enough so to make this rule necessary.
Not much of a change. If the catcher has the ball and is in the basepath they will still get hit.
Posey had the ball and was in the basepath. Avila was in the basepath. Grandal was in the basepath.
So now it comes down to judgement calls by the umpire.
All of this when there was already a rule in place that was not being enforced.
BTW, 22 times as many injuries requiring a trip to the dl for sliding headfirst than for collisions at home plate. Why didnt they ban the real problem?
Posey never had the ball and there was a clear path to the plate.