What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Simple solution to home plate collisions (1 Viewer)

boubucarow

Footballguy
Either you think the collision is a part of the game or you don't. If not, I think the answer to the problem is simple. Blocking the path of a runner is against the rules anywhere on the base paths except at a base. Disallowing the blocking of a base is a simple extension of the rule that would eliminate the collisions.

 
Either you think the collision is a part of the game or you don't. If not, I think the answer to the problem is simple. Blocking the path of a runner is against the rules anywhere on the base paths except at a base. Disallowing the blocking of a base is a simple extension of the rule that would eliminate the collisions.
I think that's a fine solution. I don't really care one way or another, but if I had to choose a side, I'd lean towards collisions not being a necessary part of the game. I don't really see the point in doing things a certain way just because that's the way it's always been done unless it makes the game either more enjoyable or more fair. Plate blocking/collisions do neither of those, but add an unnecessary element of injury risk. Doesn't make much sense to me for a non-contact sport to a play where one man stands in one spot, looking in a different direction, while another man charges at him with a 90 ft. head of steam for a collision.Not that I care that much. I don't play baseball and I've never paid more than $1 for a catcher. If I had a say in the matter, which I obviously don't, I'd vote to try to get rid of the homeplate collisions. I wouldn't miss them.
 
It's part of the game, period(and should be)
Why?
Because it's not little league
That's it? Anyone else?
Can you give me a reason why they should change the rule?Other than to avoid injuries? I'll hang up and listen.
Injuries are very much a legit reason not to allow this...particularly when that level of contact isn't allowed at any other base.
 
It's part of the game, period(and should be)
Why?
Because it's not little league
That's it? Anyone else?
Can you give me a reason why they should change the rule?Other than to avoid injuries? I'll hang up and listen.
Injuries are very much a legit reason not to allow this...particularly when that level of contact isn't allowed at any other base.
It would be pure overreaction on MLB's part to change this rule. It's a shame that an A list player was injured, but it was a fluke and nothing moreMore players are injured while sliding head first, than are injured during collisions at the plate. Where is the outrage?
 
'Wrigley said:
'Thunderlips said:
'Wrigley said:
'Thunderlips said:
'Wrigley said:
It's part of the game, period(and should be)
Why?
Because it's not little league
That's it? Anyone else?
Can you give me a reason why they should change the rule?

Other than to avoid injuries?

I'll hang up and listen.
The whole argument is to aviod injuries. That's like saying "Give me one reason to play the lottery". Other than to win money.

 
I've never understood the collision at home plate. If it's o.k. to blow up the catcher at home plate, then why can't the baserunner do the same thing to the shortstop at second base? While it's an exciting play, baseball is not a contact sport. And yet for some reason, it suddenly becomes a contact sport on plays at the plate.

 
'Thunderlips said:
'Wrigley said:
'Thunderlips said:
'Wrigley said:
'Thunderlips said:
'Wrigley said:
It's part of the game, period(and should be)
Why?
Because it's not little league
That's it? Anyone else?
Can you give me a reason why they should change the rule?Other than to avoid injuries? I'll hang up and listen.
Injuries are very much a legit reason not to allow this...particularly when that level of contact isn't allowed at any other base.
They don't give points for getting to any other base either. What are your thoughts on Football? Should the NFL switch to 2 hand touch?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've never understood the collision at home plate. If it's o.k. to blow up the catcher at home plate, then why can't the baserunner do the same thing to the shortstop at second base? While it's an exciting play, baseball is not a contact sport. And yet for some reason, it suddenly becomes a contact sport on plays at the plate.
Again, they don't award points for reaching any other base. The shortstop isn't wearing a full set of pads either. View a catcher like a goal keeper.
 
its the most exciting play in baseball. leave it.
Exactly. Catcher is wearing helmet, facemask, chest protector, leg protectors, cup, throat protector. 99.9% of the time he's fine. It's baseball. Should the bases be flush with the ground? Lotsa dudes hurt their ankles or jam their fingers sliding into or running over a bag. We should so something about that. And that brick wall in Wrigley... booo. Should be thick padding. Full face helmets would save lots of facial injuries. You know, those wooden bats break a lot... maybe metal is the way to go. Then we gotta change the ball though. Hey... those fans are at risk. let's separate them from the game with glass like in hockey.... all in the name of safety.
 
I've never understood the collision at home plate. If it's o.k. to blow up the catcher at home plate, then why can't the baserunner do the same thing to the shortstop at second base? While it's an exciting play, baseball is not a contact sport. And yet for some reason, it suddenly becomes a contact sport on plays at the plate.
Again, they don't award points for reaching any other base. The shortstop isn't wearing a full set of pads either. View a catcher like a goal keeper.
Goalies aren't fair game to be charged like they are in baseball in any sport I can think of.Consistency is key here, allow defenders to be blown up at first, second and third as well, problem solved.
 
'Thunderlips said:
'Wrigley said:
'Thunderlips said:
'Wrigley said:
'Thunderlips said:
'Wrigley said:
It's part of the game, period(and should be)
Why?
Because it's not little league
That's it? Anyone else?
Can you give me a reason why they should change the rule?Other than to avoid injuries? I'll hang up and listen.
Injuries are very much a legit reason not to allow this...particularly when that level of contact isn't allowed at any other base.
They don't give points for getting to any other base either. What are your thoughts on Football? Should the NFL switch to 2 hand touch?
Why would the NFL do that?
 
I've never understood the collision at home plate. If it's o.k. to blow up the catcher at home plate, then why can't the baserunner do the same thing to the shortstop at second base? While it's an exciting play, baseball is not a contact sport. And yet for some reason, it suddenly becomes a contact sport on plays at the plate.
Again, they don't award points for reaching any other base. The shortstop isn't wearing a full set of pads either. View a catcher like a goal keeper.
Huh....Didn't realize that hockey players can run into the goalie in an effort to dislodge the puck from his glove. Thank you.
 
'Thunderlips said:
I've never understood the collision at home plate. If it's o.k. to blow up the catcher at home plate, then why can't the baserunner do the same thing to the shortstop at second base? While it's an exciting play, baseball is not a contact sport. And yet for some reason, it suddenly becomes a contact sport on plays at the plate.
Again, they don't award points for reaching any other base. The shortstop isn't wearing a full set of pads either. View a catcher like a goal keeper.
Huh....Didn't realize that hockey players can run into the goalie in an effort to dislodge the puck from his glove. Thank you.
you dont score in hockey w/ your body. baseball is different.
 
What are your thoughts on Football? Should the NFL switch to 2 hand touch?
If you want an NFL equivalent to this play, it would be the hits on defenseless receivers while the ball is being thrown.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've never understood the collision at home plate. If it's o.k. to blow up the catcher at home plate, then why can't the baserunner do the same thing to the shortstop at second base? While it's an exciting play, baseball is not a contact sport. And yet for some reason, it suddenly becomes a contact sport on plays at the plate.
If you are talking about breaking up a double play, then if the runner doesn't slide he will get hit in the head with the ball. If other plays, you can't overrun second base, so you have to slide.
 
What are your thoughts on Football? Should the NFL switch to 2 hand touch?
If you want an NFL equivalent to this play, it would be the hits on defenseless receivers while the ball is being thrown.
The catcher is anything but defenseless.
A stationary player in an awkward, crouched position paying attention to things other than the professional athlete running full speed at him is "anything but defenseless"? OK.
 
What are your thoughts on Football? Should the NFL switch to 2 hand touch?
If you want an NFL equivalent to this play, it would be the hits on defenseless receivers while the ball is being thrown.
The catcher is anything but defenseless.
A stationary player in an awkward, crouched position paying attention to things other than the professional athlete running full speed at him is "anything but defenseless"? OK.
I'd be willing to wager that more runners are hurt during collisions at the plate than catchers.Injuries to catchers(during collisions) have to rank somewhere between outfielders colliding, and players being attacked by drunk, wife-beater wearing fans..
 
I don't see any point in allowing it to continue.

If the argument is "well, the runner is trying to score" then the OP's suggestion seems like a perfect fix. In fact, it would actually benefit the runner.

If you want to make it consistent with every other base, you change the rule to force runners to slide or otherwise attempt to avoid contact. If the point is to make it to the plate, then launching yourself at the catcher doesn't seem to be a legitimate attempt to score. It's an attempt to dislodge the ball from the catcher's glove or interfere with his attempt to catch the ball. At any other position in the field, that would be ruled interference and the runner would automatically be declared out.

People that love homeplate collisions and guys getting hurt are the same lowlifes that just watch racing hoping to see a crash and somebody get hurt.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
People that love homeplate collisions and guys getting hurt are the same lowlifes that just watch racing hoping to see a crash and somebody get hurt.
That's ridiculous. Please show me where people are saying they love seeing guys get hurt. TIA.Also, Johnny Bench's perspective on this was perfect: he teaches his catchers to NOT block home plate. By blocking home plate, you are inviting the runner to run you over, but by not, the runner will think, "Slide," since home plate is not being blocked, and then those crazy collisions won't happen nearly as much. And Bench added that we (catchers) are fair game, so I'll take his opinion over those who have never caught a game before. :thumbup: :thumbup:
 
Thoughts on Billy Beane's stance?

Since the incident, he has told Kurt Suzuki to NOT block the plate. Some writers and radio dj's have torn into Beane for this.

 
The choice to be made is up to the catcher..catch the thtow and try to tag the runner like 2B or 3B would , or block the plate. If you block the plate be prepared for the results. Could be an out..could be out for the season.

If the same play happened to Gerald Laird it may not have made Sports Center.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The choice to be made is up to the catcher..catch the thtow and try to tag the runner like 2B or 3B would , or block the plate. If you block the plate be prepared for the results. Could be an out..could be out for the season.If the same play happened to Gerald Laird it may not have made Sports Center.
I don't disagree with that.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top