2019 WS - Nationals vs. Astros - Gamethread

Status
Not open for further replies.

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
27,667
AZ
You watch maybe more baseball than most people on this site. He took a route that a good number of players take every, single game imo. It was a bad call and everyone knows it - thats why it took so long.
Every one of those runners is liable to be called for interference if hit with the throw. That is the rule. It just never matters unless the ball is hit in front of the plate. The lane is there so that throws coming from behind the runner can be made. You have to run in foul territory to avoid exactly what happened there.

For fuck’s sake. The call was exactly right. The Astros are the ones with the gripe if it is not called.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
47,265
Every one of those runners is liable to be called for interference if hit with the throw. That is the rule. It just never matters unless the ball is hit in front of the plate. The lane is there so that throws coming from behind the runner can be made. You have to run in foul territory to avoid exactly what happened there.

For fuck’s sake. The call was exactly right. The Astros are the ones with the gripe if it is not called.
Exactly.
 

jayhoz

Ronald Bartel
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
15,260
Every one of those runners is liable to be called for interference if hit with the throw. That is the rule. It just never matters unless the ball is hit in front of the plate. The lane is there so that throws coming from behind the runner can be made. You have to run in foul territory to avoid exactly what happened there.

For fuck’s sake. The call was exactly right. The Astros are the ones with the gripe if it is not called.
There was no line of site or impediment of the throw issue. The ball was up the line. It's not like it was 1 foot in front of the plate.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
10,015
SO THEY DIDN'T EVEN REVIEW IT? THEY JUST HAD HIM READ THE RULE TO THE UMP AGAIN AND HE TURNED AROUND AND SAID "YEAH, LIKE I WAS SAYING - OUT"?!?!

EDIT: Davey Martinez, in going ripshit and getting tossed, might have shown himself the most sane person involved here.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
19,707
rules infraction? what does that even mean here?

I knew it wouldn't be reviewable due to judgment call. but it ought to be reviewable and more clearly defined.
 

genoasalami

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2006
1,833
Rule 5.09 (a)(11) Comment (Rule 6.05(k) Comment): The lines marking the three-foot lane are a part of that lane and a batter-runner is required to have both feet within the three-foot lane or on the lines marking the lane. The batter-runner is permitted to exit the three-foot lane by means of a step, stride, reach or slide in the immediate vicinity of first base for the sole purpose of touching first base.
 

gedman211

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2016
2,822
It's in the same category as the reception rule in the NFL. If everyone in the bar thinks its a catch, then it's a catch
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
38,166
SO THEY DIDN'T EVEN REVIEW IT? THEY JUST HAD HIM READ THE RULE TO THE UMP AGAIN AND HE TURNED AROUND AND SAID "YEAH, LIKE I WAS SAYING - OUT"?!?!
They were discussing the protest apparently. They had to figure out if it was rules violation or judgment call.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
47,265
Rule 5.09 (a)(11) Comment (Rule 6.05(k) Comment): The lines marking the three-foot lane are a part of that lane and a batter-runner is required to have both feet within the three-foot lane or on the lines marking the lane.
There you go, clearly the right call.
 

genoasalami

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2006
1,833
There you go, clearly the right call.
Rule 5.09 (a)(11) Comment (Rule 6.05(k) Comment): The lines marking the three-foot lane are a part of that lane and a batter-runner is required to have both feet within the three-foot lane or on the lines marking the lane. The batter-runner is permitted to exit the three-foot lane by means of a step, stride, reach or slide in the immediate vicinity of first base for the sole purpose of touching first base.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
10,015
Don't know if it will be overturned but I don't understand sending the runner that was on first back to first.
That part of the rule makes sense. Jeter was sent back to first after the slappy play. Basically, the play becomes "there's a foul on the play, therefore the person committing it is out, and everything else returns to the state it was in before the foul". You can't let the offense gain an advantage out of violating the rules, which is what any other choice would result in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.