- 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 12:16 pm to sharkfhin
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:16 pm to sharkfhin
quote:
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.
Go read the rule again. You’re embarrassing yourself. He is attempting to field the ball which is allowed.
3
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:18 pm to LSU7096
quote:
Blocking the base without the ball, it's illegal.
Not always.
quote:
it shall not be considered a violation if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in a legitimate attempt to field the throw
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:20 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Your photos are after the ball bounced away from him
Correct. So he is no longer receiving the ball correct?
What play can the catcher be making while the ball his past him when he is standing in front of the plate?
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:23 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Go read the rule again. You’re embarrassing yourself. He is attempting to field the ball which is allowed.
Ok and the runner is starting to slide. This whole attempting to field the ball is such confusing language. He chose to field the ball in front home plate. It is not like the throw brought him into the runner. The catcher was standing 2 feet in front of home plate before the runner even left 3rd. If the catcher was standing 15 ft up the baseline “attempting to field the ball” would that ne ok?
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:23 pm to josh336
But you are saying the ball was about to be there. The ruling is the catchers has to have clear possession to block the plate. So if the ball was About to be there then this is obstruction
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:24 pm to lsupride87
quote:
Correct. So he is no longer receiving the ball correct? What play can the catcher be making while the ball his past him when he is standing in front of the plate?
He was in the spot he was in to field the throw, which is legal. You expect the catcher to instantly zap out of the way if he doesn’t catch the ball?
Think of this play in the catchers point of view instead of the runners. The ball is coming where it’s coming. Do you expect him to not make an attempt to catch the ball? The ball was coming in at the same time as the runner so he wasn’t posted up there way in advance to block the plate. He posted up there to catch the ball.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:26 pm to Jdawgz
quote:
The ruling is the catchers has to have clear possession to block the plate.
Again, no that’s not correct.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:27 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Not always. quote:it shall not be considered a violation if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in a legitimate attempt to field the throw
This seems to mean the throw led him into blocking the plate. That could very well be the case if the throw was from RF and the throw took the catcher up the 3rd base line. That wasn’t the case since the ball came from LF. The catcher was NOT brought up the line to field the ball. Catcher was standing a few feet in front of the plate before the OF even threw the ball.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:28 pm to LSU316
He didn't lower his body or his shoulder. He raised his hands to his own chest to protect himself. Runner had no idea he would come up the baseline some to block him with no baseball.
No baseball, catcher obstruction
Malicious contact warrants an ejection. Imo it wasnt malicious. They were both like wtf....runner shouldn't be penalized in this situation. Just like the catcher wasn't altho he shouldn't have been there to begin with. He had his catchers gear on thats it..The baseball wasn't even in his glove. The catcher should have remained in one of 2 places from a coaching standpoint. Right in front of plate on 3rd base side or right inside the plate on 3rd base side. This catcher knew this but he "chose" to cut off the runner instead regardless if he had the ball or not.. if anything the catcher "induced" this outcome, not the runner. Its just like a batter on a swing during a steal and gets called out for obstruction of the catchers line of sight to 2nd. The batter knew what he was doing and that was to help his runner. The catcher did the same thing to help his outfielder moving up the line to create possible contact either way. In his case, he ran up the line some to block the runner from scoring even tho the ball was still in flight before the runner got home not even knowing is he was gonna posses the ball or not. Thats not attempting to make a play, thats attempting to block the runner. Its the same thing, except this time, its the catcher who is doing the obstructing.
No baseball, catcher obstruction
Malicious contact warrants an ejection. Imo it wasnt malicious. They were both like wtf....runner shouldn't be penalized in this situation. Just like the catcher wasn't altho he shouldn't have been there to begin with. He had his catchers gear on thats it..The baseball wasn't even in his glove. The catcher should have remained in one of 2 places from a coaching standpoint. Right in front of plate on 3rd base side or right inside the plate on 3rd base side. This catcher knew this but he "chose" to cut off the runner instead regardless if he had the ball or not.. if anything the catcher "induced" this outcome, not the runner. Its just like a batter on a swing during a steal and gets called out for obstruction of the catchers line of sight to 2nd. The batter knew what he was doing and that was to help his runner. The catcher did the same thing to help his outfielder moving up the line to create possible contact either way. In his case, he ran up the line some to block the runner from scoring even tho the ball was still in flight before the runner got home not even knowing is he was gonna posses the ball or not. Thats not attempting to make a play, thats attempting to block the runner. Its the same thing, except this time, its the catcher who is doing the obstructing.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 12:45 pm
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:29 pm to STEVED00
quote:
seems to mean the throw led him into blocking the plate. That could very well be the case if the throw was from RF and the throw took the catcher up the 3rd base line. That wasn’t the case since the ball came from LF. The catcher was NOT brought up the line to field the ball. Catcher was standing a few feet in front of the plate before the OF even threw the ball.
Y’all are still only looking at this in the runners point of view. Should the catcher attempt to field the ball in foul territory by the backstop to make sure he’s not in the runners path? He still has a right to be in position to make the out as long as he is making a legitimate attempt to field the ball.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:31 pm to josh336
You want him to slide and risk injuring/dislocating his shoulder because the catcher was blocking the plate without the ball? Thats beyond idiotic. He did attempt to slide, braced himself and this hit wasn’t malicious at all. He could’ve cleaned that catchers clock and he didn’t. It was an atrocious call and had that happened to an LSU player, not a single person that’s a fan of this team would be in agreement, even partially understanding of it.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:31 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
He was in the spot he was in to field the throw, which is legal. You expect the catcher to instantly zap out of the way if he doesn’t catch the ball?
I believe the intent of the rule is if the throw takes the C into the runner and not the case where the C chooses to receive the ball several feet in front of the plate. Catcher could have easily field the ball w/o needing to block the plate and there would have been no collision at all.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:31 pm to Mickey Goldmill
You dont know what making an attempt means. I'm out. And again your wrong.
Making an attempt to catch a ball means just that, trying to catch the ball. He didn't. In fact he wasn't even on home plate while the attempt was being made. Stick to pee wee ball bro.
Making an attempt to catch a ball doesn't mean "move up the baseline" to catch it.
Making an attempt to catch a ball means just that, trying to catch the ball. He didn't. In fact he wasn't even on home plate while the attempt was being made. Stick to pee wee ball bro.
Making an attempt to catch a ball doesn't mean "move up the baseline" to catch it.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 12:49 pm
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:32 pm to STEVED00
quote:would have been clearly out at the plate easily without running up baseline if he caught the ball. You are 1000% correct in that judgement. People think making an attempt to catch a ball means to move up the baseline to block the runner also. Thats the gamble the "catcher took" and he lost, no baseball to protect himself..
quote:
He was in the spot he was in to field the throw, which is legal. You expect the catcher to instantly zap out of the way if he doesn’t catch the ball?
I believe the intent of the rule is if the throw takes the C into the runner and not the case where the C chooses to receive the ball several feet in front of the plate. Catcher could have easily field the ball w/o needing to block the plate and there would have been no collision at all.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 12:50 pm
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:33 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Y’all are still only looking at this in the runners point of view. Should the catcher attempt to field the ball in foul territory by the backstop to make sure he’s not in the runners path? He still has a right to be in position to make the out as long as he is making a legitimate attempt to field the ball.
No he should field it right at home plate. He chose to move up the line to catch it so he could block the plate.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:37 pm to STEVED00
quote:
I believe the intent of the rule is if the throw takes the C into the runner and not the case where the C chooses to receive the ball several feet in front of the plate. Catcher could have easily field the ball w/o needing to block the plate and there would have been no collision at all.
But the catcher still has a right to be in position to make the play, even if blocking the plate. They don’t want a rule where the catcher has to stand clear out of the way and just let the runner coast into home plate. The intent is to avoid the catcher blocking without ever even going to catch the ball (not trying to make an out, just using his body to obstruct the path). As long as you can reasonably argue he is trying to catch the ball to make the out, he can block the plate.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:37 pm to STEVED00
quote:agreed also. Not saying the catcher cant do it but the gamble is if you dont catch the ball, your fricked and all bets are off. Runner didn't lower his shoulder, its not done with malicious intent.
No he should field it right at home plate. He chose to move up the line to catch it so he could block the plate.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:38 pm to STEVED00
quote:
No he should field it right at home plate. He chose to move up the line to catch it so he could block the plate.
Which he is allowed to do. He doesn’t have to be at any specific spot.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:40 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
He was in the spot he was in to field the throw, which is legal. You expect the catcher to instantly zap out of the way if he doesn’t catch the ball?
Of course not, but the catcher had to understand that if he doesn't catch the ball, he's now violating the rule which could lead to an obstruction call. If he doesn't want to take that chance, he should allow the runner to have a lane and attempt to catch the ball that way. They got this call wrong.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 12:41 pm to Mickey Goldmill
The C did NOT need to be clear out of the way. If he was simply standing at home plate INSTEAD of 3 feet in front of it then we wouldn’t be discussing anything.
Hell if he is standing at home plate instead of in front of it he probably holds on and makes the tag of the sliding runner.
Hell if he is standing at home plate instead of in front of it he probably holds on and makes the tag of the sliding runner.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 12:43 pm
Page 7 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News