Are umpires ignoring instant replay?

[RedsBrick]

Hypothetical: What if a runner rounds third and isn't even halfway to home but the catcher, at the time, happens to be in front of the plate on the third base line without the ball, should the runner automatically be called safe?

[Roy Tucker]

I think they need to have a web site and 800 number and let fans vote on the call. Kind of like American Idol.

[Cedric]

We need the games to be perfect to be fun. I think we should replay every ball and strike call because lord knows sports aren't fun if they aren't perfect.

[RollyInRaleigh]

Wonder what the outcome would have been had Bernadina mowed him down? He clearly was blocking the plate. There was no access.

[RedlegJake]

I don't see where the new rule has changed anything if last night was an example. Bernadina could have gone into the catcher shoulder first, rolling him up because there was no window to the plate whatsoever. To slide normally, as Sanchez was set, is simply giving yourself up. If the interpretation is that if the throw and runner are very close to simultaneous then the catcher can block, things are pretty much the same. The only thing is a catcher can't block if the throw is obviously late. If the interpretation is that the catcher must have the ball to block the plate, then Sanchez was clearly blocking because he set up across and in front of the plate well before the runner or ball either one arrived. Still, I'd have a problem overturning that call....the runner was out by a mile on a decent throw. I think that was why the call was upheld. Had the throw been high or off line and he kept the plate blocked to reach up or out and then turned to tag while blocking the runner off the plate I think he would have been called safe. That wasn't the case. Throw on the money. Timing was bang-bang. Runner out.

[TOBTTReds]

We need the games to be perfect to be fun. I think we should replay every ball and strike call because lord knows sports aren't fun if they aren't perfect.

I understand your facetious take on this, but unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your position), more than just "fun" is on the line. Each win/loss can mean a lot of $ for teams.

[Bumstead]

I understand your facetious take on this, but unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your position), more than just "fun" is on the line. Each win/loss can mean a lot of $ for teams.

Yes, cause as we know MLB teams and it's players are really struggling financially...

As to the interference rule (and I did not see the play), the catcher can stand wherever he wants up until the runner gets to the plate. At that point he has to have the ball or be catching the ball to be between the runner and the plate. If the runner hasn't reached the plate the rule does not apply. Again, I did not see the play in question and I have no opinion on it; I'm just clarifying the rule a bit.

Bum

[Hoosier Red]

Yeah, why slow down the game with replay if we're stuck with the same Band of Brothers mentality.

While I agree that it's silly if "umpires are just going to back each other up," I've never quite understood the argument that it's truly slowing things down. It seems much faster to go to the booth than to have a coach come out and make a spectacle.
I also think the rope on coaches should be much shorter. As in, you can come out, discuss if it's reviewable, that's it. Any arguing is cause for an immediate ejection and HUGE fine.

[REDREAD]

There have been multiple reviews around the league where umpires have been clearly wrong but held up their initial ruling despite it. This appears to have happened in the 9th of today's Reds game as well where Bernadina was called out despite the Pirates catcher appearing to violate the new plate blocking rule.

What's going on here, blue?

This was my fear with instant replay.
Umps always have backed each other up.
We need non-umpires in the review booth. Honestly, much less skilled people can review the instant replay. Umps need to make a split second decision which is a skill. Instant replay guys have plenty of time.
Unfortunately, now that we have umps in the booth, it's doubtful the union will ever let MLB pull them out.
So yea, we're stuck with the buddy system, which means some dishonesty in the reviews, all for the sake of not making their buddy look bad.

[757690]

Yes, cause as we know MLB teams and it's players are really struggling financially...

As to the interference rule (and I did not see the play), the catcher can stand wherever he wants up until the runner gets to the plate. At that point he has to have the ball or be catching the ball to be between the runner and the plate. If the runner hasn't reached the plate the rule does not apply. Again, I did not see the play in question and I have no opinion on it; I'm just clarifying the rule a bit.

Bum

Thanks.

If that's the case, then the new rule really doesn't change anything. A catcher can still block the plate on most plays at the plate, since he can almost always claim that he's catching the ball. If he's not catching the ball, it's not a close enough play to matter. The runner and the ball are almost always approaching the pate at the around the same time, if there is a play at the plate.

This new rule gives the catcher a huge advantage over the runner, since the runner can't run into the catcher. If that's the rule, it's a terrible rule.

[Trajinous]

NHL has instant replay figured out. Things get just as weird and hard to decipher and yet their replays rarely take more than a minute. MLB just needs to clone their set-up.

[George Anderson]

While I agree that it's silly if "umpires are just going to back each other up," I've never quite understood the argument that it's truly slowing things down. It seems much faster to go to the booth than to have a coach come out and make a spectacle.
I also think the rope on coaches should be much shorter. As in, you can come out, discuss if it's reviewable, that's it. Any arguing is cause for an immediate ejection and HUGE fine.

I am not at all opposed to the replay but I think it is being used a bit to much or there are to many instances where managers are taking a slow walk out to the umpire waiting for his guys in the dugout to watch the replay and see if it is worth challenging. I think we are going to see more and more managers doing this on every remotely close play which is going to drag the game on and make this replay system a bad thing IMO. Something needs to change.

[Bumstead]

Thanks.

If that's the case, then the new rule really doesn't change anything. A catcher can still block the plate on most plays at the plate, since he can almost always claim that he's catching the ball. If he's not catching the ball, it's not a close enough play to matter. The runner and the ball are almost always approaching the pate at the around the same time, if there is a play at the plate.

This new rule gives the catcher a huge advantage over the runner, since the runner can't run into the catcher. If that's the rule, it's a terrible rule.

By catching the ball, I mean literally catching the ball (not 3 feet from catching it) and the ball has to be headed to that spot. I just watched the Bernadina play and Bernadina wasn't to the plate when Sanchez caught the ball. Sanchez had the ball long before Bernadina got there. I don't see what the argument is with that play. It's not really close. Price had it reviewed and it was upheld. Probably figured it was the 8th inning, might as well ask about it.

[757690]

By catching the ball, I mean literally catching the ball (not 3 feet from catching it) and the ball has to be headed to that spot. I just watched the Bernadina play and Bernadina wasn't to the plate when Sanchez caught the ball. Sanchez had the ball long before Bernadina got there. I don't see what the argument is with that play. It's not really close. Price had it reviewed and it was upheld. Probably figured it was the 8th inning, might as well ask about it.

The point is that the catcher can still block the plate, while the runner is not allowed to run into him. That gives the catcher a huge advantage.

And look at the play again. Bernadina and ball arrive at the same time, which is how most plays at the plate occur. I'll post a screen shot in a bit to show what I mean.

[Bumstead]

The point is that the catcher can still block the plate, while the runner is not allowed to run into him. That gives the catcher a huge advantage.

And look at the play again. Bernadina and ball arrive at the same time, which is how most plays at the plate occur. I'll post a screen shot in a bit to show what I mean.

I watched it about 10 times. Sanchez caught the ball before Bernadina even slid. I'm not disputing your first statement at all. It clearly gives the catcher the advantage. I imagine as this all unfolds, 3rd base coaches will have to get a little more conservative. Bernadina just ran into an out. The point is, if the throw is on the other side of the plate the catcher can't block the plate, catch the ball and then tag the runner. If the throw is on the money the catcher is going to be in position to catch the ball and hinder the runners ability to score. That's what he is supposed to do. Not sure any of us really want to see catchers get lit up behind the plate. It never made much sense to be able to do that at home but not any other base anyway. Most fans prefer their players not to get injured, I would guess. I don't have a problem with the rule. Don't run into outs is the bottom line. If you have no chance to score, what are you doing?

Bum