More 7.13 fun ....

[Thunderheads]

http://m.mlb.com/video/v35440661

[scrounge]

This play shouldn't be reviewable, any more than any other interference/obstruction call is.

[Larry in TN]

I get a headache every time I watch one of these 7.13 plays...

[ricka56]

Good overturn. F2s need to adjust to the rule. They have to learn to receive the ball before blocking the plate. Enforcing this rule is how they learn.

 

Remember, if MLB doesn't want R3/F2 collisions (7.13(1)), then F2 has to give access to HP (7.13(2)). Just like F3 with good footwork around 1B, so too will F2s have to learn good foowork to comply with 7.13(2).

[zoops]

Looked to me like he had the ball when the blocking occurred.  Again, no one would ever call this in real time.

[JaxRolo]

Looked to me like he had the ball when the blocking occurred. Again, no one would ever call this in real time.

MLB guys would. I think they are making a statement to get the re changed.

[BigSimonia]

Really, FED has this right - If it's malicious contact the runner is out and ejected.  Add that to the old rule that allows a catcher to block the plate if he's in the act of receiving the throw (or go all-out NFHS, no blocking without actual possession of the ball).   As I've said before, MC is like porn - everyone knows it when they see it

[Richvee]

Really, FED has this right - If it's malicious contact the runner is out and ejected.  Add that to the old rule that allows a catcher to block the plate if he's in the act of receiving the throw (or go all-out NFHS, no blocking without actual possession of the ball).   As I've said before, MC is like porn - everyone knows it when they see it

The problem is I think we're seeing runners ruled safe for F2's "blocking"the plate without the ball when runners aren't even close to home. I don't understand why F2 should have to "give the runner a lane" when the runner is 30 feet from home. They're calling guys safe at home on these replays that we wouldn't call OBS in FED!

[Richvee]

BTW..Nice haircut, Mr. Reyes.