Footwedge;1616020 wrote:The catcher did not block the plate have no idea what Underwood was bitchin about. A good play by their defense.

TBone14;1616011 wrote:I forgot about that. I need to see the replay again now. Have they awarded home on that at all this year in that situation?

Of 17 umpire-initiated reviews on plays at the plate, only two have been overturned. But MLB believes there should have been more calls reversed. The new video highlights two categories of calls that should have been a violation, La Russa said, but were allowed to stand.

The first involves plays where the catcher initially sets up properly to receive a throw, allowing the runner a path home, but then, "as he starts to receive the ball, sticks out his left leg to take the plate away," La Russa said. Those runners have been called out, and reviews have allowed those calls to stand. That interpretation is about to change, La Russa intimated.

"Several of the videos show that this move should be considered a violation," he said. "And it will be a violation."

Angels manager Mike Scioscia told ESPN.com that he believes the key to clarifying the rule is simply to determine "when a play at the plate starts."

"Does it start when a ball is hit to the outfield?" Scioscia said. "Does it start when a runner tags third? Or does it start when a runner is 45 feet away [from home]? Because then a runner is obviously looking for the lane at some point that he's supposed to have from the catcher, right? So I think we've got to determine when does the play at the plate start. ... That has to be totally defined -- with us, with umpires and with replay officials."

HitsRus;1616215 wrote:some Tribe notes of interest:
.
Jason kipnis is making progress towards and early June return. He is hitting off a tee. Kipnis is expected to take a minor league rehab assignment prior to re-joining the club.

Catcher George Kottaras, who made the most of his 1 game with the Tribe, (clubbing 2 HRs in May 4th's loss) and subsequently was DFA'ed almost immediately afterward, ....has cleared waivers and was outrighted to AAA Columbus.

Footwedge;1616020 wrote:The catcher did not block the plate have no idea what Underwood was bitchin about. A good play by their defense.

Wasn't he brought up for Gomes' paternity leave?

Hell, Manziel woulda' scored, don't ya' think?

HitsRus;1616069 wrote:I saw that play on replay and there was no problem. Santana was just out. period.


Need a win today to give us a chance to take the series.

TBone14;1616127 wrote:I watched a couple more replays. Good baseball play by the catcher. If that isn't allowed, I am not sure what catchers should be doing. Santana would have had a chance with a hook slide towards the field. He needed to get down faster. He got tagged in the damn chest.

•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.

Glory Days;1616282 wrote:... but was he forced out of the base path by the catcher being in front of the plate?...

Con_Alma;1616285 wrote:It didn't appear that way to me at all.

iclfan2;1616287 wrote:Asdrubal killlllls me

Laley23;1616289 wrote:I actually thought it was pretty clear he was in front, based on how the rule seems to be "written" as of now. But, as Mike Scocia said, we need to know if the ball taking you into the path counts as blocking.