- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Do the umps make this call at Alex Box?
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:51 am to lsupride87
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:51 am to lsupride87
Just to highlight just how obvious he wasn’t “receiving the ball”
The pictures below
Picture 1. Ball is already going behind him
Picture 2. Ball is way behind him.
He wasn’t in the act of receiving anything when contact was made
Also, to make matters worse picture 1 shows the runner started his slide really early actually as well
The pictures below
Picture 1. Ball is already going behind him
Picture 2. Ball is way behind him.
He wasn’t in the act of receiving anything when contact was made
Also, to make matters worse picture 1 shows the runner started his slide really early actually as well
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 11:52 am
2
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:52 am to lsupride87
quote:
He wasn’t in the act of receiving anything when contact was made
To be fair he was in the act of receiving a bad arse body check from the runner but yes by my understanding that’s obstruction….
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:53 am to LSU316
Well basically it ended up being an ejection because the umpire ruled the contact to be malicious. Thats whu he got ejected.To me that wasn't malicious. Anyone should go watch utube on what is actually machines. It wasnt pretty but thats the gamble the catch took. Shouldnt be the runner's fault. Catcher was blocking his path and right to the baseline based on the play itself.
If the reply guys said no obstruction then I guess a SS can get into the baseline too while a runner is advancing to third without the ball and obstruction him without any consequences. Those replay guys got it wrong. They let their softy deranged syndrome get into the way of their decision.
If the reply guys said no obstruction then I guess a SS can get into the baseline too while a runner is advancing to third without the ball and obstruction him without any consequences. Those replay guys got it wrong. They let their softy deranged syndrome get into the way of their decision.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 11:59 am
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:54 am to lsupride87
Your photos are after the ball bounced away from him
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:54 am to LSU316
quote:
To be fair he was in the act of receiving a bad arse body check from the runner but yes by my understanding that’s obstruction….
He got hit by the start of his slide. You slide through home plate and not slide to stop on home plate.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:56 am to sharkfhin
quote:
I'm not wrong. Look up the rule. He never POSESSED the ball. Can't block the plate without possession of the ball. End of story. You just embarrassed yourself.
Looked up the rule. Here you go. I’ll take your anpologies anytime you’re ready.
c. 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. 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 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 the pitcher or drawn-in infielder). In addition, a catcher without possession of the ball shall not be adjudged to be in violation if the runner could have avoided the collision with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) by sliding.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:57 am to sharkfhin
So here’s what I saw….let’s say obstruction is out the window as the replay ruled (which I disagree with)….it looked to me like the runner did lower his body like his thought was I need to get my body into the glove to dislodge the ball because at that point the runner has to assume he has the ball. That’s intent…..also if why the hell not slide?!?!?!?
Again the more and more I look at all the angles and shots I think it was 100% obstruction and all this should be a moot point.
Again the more and more I look at all the angles and shots I think it was 100% obstruction and all this should be a moot point.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 11:59 am
Posted on 5/31/25 at 11:58 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
In addition, a catcher without possession of the ball shall not be adjudged to be in violation if the runner could have avoided the collision with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) by sliding.
That friend is an interesting point of the rule and may be how we got to where we did.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:00 pm to CDawson
quote:
Pussified sports are the thing now.
Good God, STFU with this bullshite.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:02 pm to Mickey Goldmill
You answered. They are basing it off of malicious contact. Thats wasnt malicious. Catcher obstruction should have been the call. If the catcher isnt there, the runner tags just fine. Catcher was in his way with no baseball. The "judgement" by replay was that it was malicious. Left wing call. Not the right call.
How was he supposed to avoid it? He could he. Aremyou expecting him to slide? If he slid trying to get to home in that exact situation he would have been a few feet short of the plate anyways because the catcher blocked him without the ball. No way I call that against the runner.
How was he supposed to avoid it? He could he. Aremyou expecting him to slide? If he slid trying to get to home in that exact situation he would have been a few feet short of the plate anyways because the catcher blocked him without the ball. No way I call that against the runner.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 12:05 pm
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:04 pm to sharkfhin
Catcher made a play to field the throw. Didn’t have to have possession. End of story. You just embarrassed yourself.
You’re arguing a different point now. I was simply pointing out your understanding of the rule was obviously wrong in that the catcher doesn’t have to have possession of the ball.
You’re arguing a different point now. I was simply pointing out your understanding of the rule was obviously wrong in that the catcher doesn’t have to have possession of the ball.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:06 pm to Mickey Goldmill
No he didn't. He has no right to move up the baseline cutting off the runner in order to impede his motion towards home. Did the catcher have the ball? Nope. Was he making a play on the runner? Nope. He CANT make a play on the runner because again , he does not have possessionof the ball. The baseball was on the back stop. If the catcher had been slightly in front of home plate or slightly on the 3rd base side of the plate and the runner nails him then I can see an ejection, not 5 ft up the line cutting him off.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 12:09 pm
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:08 pm to sharkfhin
The catcher has the right to move anywhere he wants to field the throw. That’s what he did. He can’t post up to block the plate way before the ball is coming to him, but that’s not what happened. The ball got there at the same time as the runner. He had the right to be where he was which is why there was no obstruction.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:09 pm to LSU316
quote:
So here’s what I saw….let’s say obstruction is out the window as the replay ruled (which I disagree with)….it looked to me like the runner did lower his body like his thought was I need to get my body into the glove to dislodge the ball because at that point the runner has to assume he has the ball. That’s intent…..also if why the hell not slide?!?!?!?
Go look at the still shots Pride posted. He clearly was starting to slide.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:09 pm to sharkfhin
quote:
If he slid trying to get to home in that exact situation he would have been a few feet short of the plate anyways
I respectfully disagree with this…..he had a path to the plate for a slide when he started to lower his body for contact. This might be why replay said no obstruction…..I still think that’s a rough call but it may be their explanation.
I’ll say this if this happened to LSU I’d be pissed and I’d probably kick my cat.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:12 pm to STEVED00
Looks like you might be right…..he should have finished it…it would have accomplished the same result basically.
This is a tough call…..I’d have went with obstruction and let the run score if it were my call.
This is a tough call…..I’d have went with obstruction and let the run score if it were my call.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:13 pm to Mickey Goldmill
Thats exactly what happened. You saying he is attempting to make a play...there can be no play by definition if he doesn't have possession of ball. He ran up the baseline with the ball....obstruction 100%. That isnt even the question
He got ejected for malicious contact. That is not malicious but it was a judgemental call by the far left pussies at headquarters. Wanna see malicious, look up mlb malicious contact on utube. According to your judgement, any fielder can block any runner advancing to the next base without the ball and get away with it.
"but blue I was making a play on the ball"....
He got ejected for malicious contact. That is not malicious but it was a judgemental call by the far left pussies at headquarters. Wanna see malicious, look up mlb malicious contact on utube. According to your judgement, any fielder can block any runner advancing to the next base without the ball and get away with it.
"but blue I was making a play on the ball"....Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:14 pm to LSU316
Yeah I disagree. He was lowering his body to slide. Look at the photo Pride posted. He is leaning back and clearly beginning his slide.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:14 pm to josh336
Blocking the base causes that collision.
Blocking the base without the ball, it's illegal.
Blocking the base without the ball, it's illegal.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:16 pm to STEVED00
Yep I see what you are saying…..tough business here
Page 6 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News