Good Plate Mechanics on Play at Plate

[johnnyg08]

 

[jimurrayalterego]

43 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

 

Does the review include whether there was Obstruction. Does the coach have to specify that's what he wants reviewed?

[johnnyg08]

3 minutes ago, jimurrayalterego said:

Does the review include whether there was Obstruction. Does the coach have to specify that's what he wants reviewed?

I cut all of that out b/c the announcers were clueless (shock)...it seemed as though they were only reviewing safe/out. 

 

[jimurrayalterego]

2 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

I cut all of that out b/c the announcers were clueless (shock)...it seemed as though they were only reviewing safe/out. 

 

I think the initial position is legal and he had the step to block when he had the ball. But is that also reviewed on replay?

[SeeingEyeDog]

The announcers...the announcers...it has always been the announcers, it still is the announcers and it always will be the announcers. They THINK they know what happened on the play, influenced by their rooting interest and the source of their paychecks. This is a close play. This is a very, very close play. So, how about just TELLING us what IS happening versus what you SPECULATE happened?

This is how this should sound, "Close play at the plate here. The plate umpire sets up well on this and...the call is out. Baylor now requesting for review so, we will wait a few moments here. And now, after review...that call at the plate is confirmed and...we have an out."

That's it. That's all that needs to be said here. Just tell people the facts...

~Dawg

[BLWizzRanger]

ORrrrrrrrr,

"Congratulations on getting this on-air talent.  One job requirement is for you to read this rule book and take the umpires test every year."

There are three positions or experiences to each game: player, manager, and umpire.  They always leave the umpire experiences out when trying to fill a job.

[Velho]

15 hours ago, jimurrayalterego said:

I think the initial position is legal and he had the step to block when he had the ball.

If he had stepped early, how would that be considered under the clarification language in 8-7-c?

Quote

"Unless the catcher is in possession of the ball, the catcher cannot block the pathway of the runner as they are 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. Notwithstanding the above, it shall not be considered a violation if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in a legitimate attempt to field a throw that arrives at the position of the catcher at the same time as the runner, (e.g., in reaction to the direction, trajectory or the hop of the incoming throw, or in reaction to a throw that originates from the pitcher or drawn-in infielder)."

That is nearly verbatim with OBR where, in application, F2 is given great leeway when the throw comes from an infielder.

[BigBlue4u]

On 2/20/2026 at 8:26 AM, Velho said:

"Unless the catcher is in possession of the ball, the catcher cannot block the pathway of the runner as they are 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. "

This is the stupidest interpretation of the obstruction rule on record.  The classic example is this play involving umpire Mike Winters.  The rule should simply state, "It is not obstruction If a fielder is in possession of the ball upon the arrival of the runners.  Period!

CIN@MIA Redmond ejected after arguing a horrible call (overturned in 8th)

[JSam21]

On 2/22/2026 at 3:37 PM, BigBlue4u said:

CIN@MIA Redmond ejected after arguing a horrible call (overturned in 8th)

This call was before the rule had changed to the current rule and was correct for the time it occurred.