And it begins ...

[KJ Duke]

Banning home plate collisions. Next up, ban throwing inside. After that, ban arguing (to be renamed bullying) with ump. We're on a one way trend to wusball.

[joshguy]

whats the point of getting a guy blow'd up other than it looks kinda cool? Its already in the rules, so from what I understand its not so much a rule change as it is an enforcement. Is it really worth a serious injury to keep it in the game?

[KJ Duke]

whats the point of getting a guy blow'd up other than it looks kinda cool? Its already in the rules, so from what I understand its not so much a rule change as it is an enforcement. Is it really worth a serious injury to keep it in the game?

Catchers can protect themselves with proper positioning with the exception of fluke plays; you can't legislate against a fluky injury anyway. 99% of Catchers have been just fine for a hundred years. Teams can protect their investment by teaching technique, not changing the game.

[bjoak]

Yeah, and the next thing you know they're going to make pitchers where a lining inside their hat to prevent them from getting brain damage. Wussies.

[KJ Duke]

Yeah, and the next thing you know they're going to make pitchers where a lining inside their hat to prevent them from getting brain damage. Wussies.

Really - one bad injury per season or two and we need a rule to change a 100-year old game? In football two dozen guys go down every weekend and by the time they're 45 one in twenty has brain damage. Football needed rule changes. Baseball is just fine as is (was).

I don't care if pitchers wear a helmet, just don't make them wear one. Just like politics - constant tinkering by people who think they're smart but they're just f'in it up.

[DOUGHBOYS]

There were very few crashes last year. An unwritten edict seemed to have gone out last year, limiting those plays anyway.
All part of the wussification of America.

I won't be around to see it, but I'm betting that fences, themselves, will be banned from Major League parks in 50 or so years.
A computer or some other tech tech gizmo will be used to decide where runner placements will be for balls hit past outfielders.
Anything hit over a line will be a home run. One hop over that line, a ground rule double. Anything that rolls past that line will be judged by the computerized umpire. We can't have our outfielders crashing into fences, can we?

If anything, the use of pitch counts has led to more injury, and still, they are considered viable and reliable.
Even kids use then for Little Leagues.
Who says it's safer?
Nobody really. A lot of doctors think it good. A lot disagree.
But, it sounds good....and it sounds safe...THAT, is what counts in today's America.
And that is why....'And it begins', happens.

[bjoak]

Actually, the thing about pitch counts is that high ones lead to bad results the next time out. Please don't tell me about how that wasn't the case in 1930 when pitchers were throwing 70 mph. In the contemporary era, there is plenty of evidence to support this. Every time a guy throws a no-hitter, my wife says, "Wow, he's going to suck next time out," and she's almost always right, or at least when there's a high pitch count involved. There was one year where the Blue Jays were so bad at managing Halladay that they'd leave him in for 130 pitches on a good day; then he'd give up six runs next time, leave early, and then well-rested threw 130 pitches the following time. Repeat until the end of the season. They never figured out they were the problem.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Actually, the thing about pitch counts is that high ones lead to bad results the next time out. Please don't tell me about how that wasn't the case in 1930 when pitchers were throwing 70 mph. In the contemporary era, there is plenty of evidence to support this. Every time a guy throws a no-hitter, my wife says, "Wow, he's going to suck next time out," and she's almost always right, or at least when there's a high pitch count involved. There was one year where the Blue Jays were so bad at managing Halladay that they'd leave him in for 130 pitches on a good day; then he'd give up six runs next time, leave early, and then well-rested threw 130 pitches the following time. Repeat until the end of the season. They never figured out they were the problem.

Bad results, maybe. For the next time out.
Injury? No.

[joshguy]

There is no point in blocking the plate, just like a runner shouldnt be blocked from any other base. I can understand the teams wanting to protect their big investments in catchers. When Rose nailed Fosse, it pretty much ended his career. When Cousins ended Posey's season...Even with "proper" technique, the catchers or runners can suffer concussions or other serious injuries. Just because thats how it was in the good old days doesnt make it right.

Its like me saying, let me paint your house with lead paint and insulate it with asbestos. Sure you might be ok..but why take the risk? Just like our knowledge of the risks of these products have changed over time, sports are gaining knowledge on how to protect players.

[DOUGHBOYS]

There is no point in blocking the plate, just like a runner shouldnt be blocked from any other base. I can understand the teams wanting to protect their big investments in catchers. When Rose nailed Fosse, it pretty much ended his career. When Cousins ended Posey's season...Even with "proper" technique, the catchers or runners can suffer concussions or other serious injuries. Just because thats how it was in the good old days doesnt make it right.

Its like me saying, let me paint your house with lead paint and insulate it with asbestos. Sure you might be ok..but why take the risk? Just like our knowledge of the risks of these products have changed over time, sports are gaining knowledge on how to protect players.

150 years to gain knowledge?

It's our society. We're becoming protective of everything.

[Donnie Baseball]

Come on Joshguy. You sound a little gay! I agree it is all about wussifying American men. Play the game hard and live with a few risks I say. The catcher does not own home plate.

[KJ Duke]

There is no point in blocking the plate, just like a runner shouldnt be blocked from any other base. I can understand the teams wanting to protect their big investments in catchers. When Rose nailed Fosse, it pretty much ended his career. When Cousins ended Posey's season...Even with "proper" technique, the catchers or runners can suffer concussions or other serious injuries. Just because thats how it was in the good old days doesnt make it right.

Its like me saying, let me paint your house with lead paint and insulate it with asbestos. Sure you might be ok..but why take the risk? Just like our knowledge of the risks of these products have changed over time, sports are gaining knowledge on how to protect players.

So where does it stop Josh?
Pitchers get hurt from line drives. ... put up nets
They also tear ligaments ... use a pitching machine
Baserunners sprain ankles on slides ... use flat virtual bases
Runners tear ACLs ... use batter track times to calculate safe or out
Outfielders run into walls ... make them all of feathers
Umpires get their feelings hurt ... ban "bullying" these poor souls.

Seriously, where is the line drawn? Baseball injuries are relatively infrequent compared to other sports.
More pads and better helmets, fine.
My line in the sand is when it changes the game. And this changes the game.

[Dak]

Come on Joshguy. You sound a little gay! I agree it is all about wussifying American men. Play the game hard and live with a few risks I say. The catcher does not own home plate.

This guy sounds like a bit of a moron.........right Josh! How 'bout bowling over the second and third baseman??!!!

In the old days they had 30 bucks tied up in the catcher............how about 17 mil now!!!! KJ should know as well as anyone.............protect your investment!

[Edwards Kings]

"You were fluffier and whiter in my day...of course we wore onions on our belts which was the fashion at the time and sodie pop had razor blades in the bottoms of the bottles as prizes...."

I disagree with the moratorium on blocking the plate as well, but man do we sound like curmudgeons...I wonder if the same conversations were had when they started using so many baseballs in a game, put names on uniforms, started tracking saves...etc.

Maybe it is just me...

[KJ Duke]

At a certain age you don't want things to change.

Then, at an older age, everything you see looks like a danger to bodily injury. Guess what age Bud Selig has reached.

[poopytooth]

Come on Joshguy. You sound a little gay! I agree it is all about wussifying American men. Play the game hard and live with a few risks I say. The catcher does not own home plate.

So then does taking risks and getting hurt mean you are on the non gay team? Would you enjoy sitting at home and not being able to put together a complete sentence from concussion damage? Or not being able to interact with your own kids?

Screw that...sign me up for the gay team. Even if it is one player in a generation. ..why not keep them safe.

[BK METS]

Its not official yet. Both the players union and the owners need to approve it. But, when it is approved, it should be called the Buster Posey rule. I don't like it. One of the most exciting plays in baseball is the play at home plate and the crash. I am hearing that the replay rule is also going to be able to judge whether a player intended to take out the catcher...

[KJ Duke]

Even if it is one player in a generation. ..why not keep them safe.

I can't believe I'm reading this on a baseball message board ... just ban all sports and be done with it, one in a million is too much.

[Walla Walla]

Actually I think it's a Great idea! Unlike football it doesn't effect the basic rules of the game. Baseball hasn't been a macho sport ever. Pitchers miss games because they tore a fingernail. Way to tough it out! A baseball fight is a joke. You want macho go watch boxing or hockey. Hmm same thing I guess.

[NorCalAtlFan]

would this have even come up if Gerard Posey knew proper defensive positioning on a play at the plate?

as a footnote, one sunday watching football this fall i saw on the scroll that the NFL was going to meet in the offseason to discuss rule changes that would further protect the qb. i spit up whatever i was ingesting. my only thought was that the nfl was going to institute the one mississippi two mississippi rule to pass rushers.

[Navel Lint]

There have always been collisions at the plate, but anyone that has really watched the game the last 40+ years knows that the amount of contact has gone way up in the ESPN era.

Do I have hard data to back up that statement? No. Yet I’m fairly certain it’s true.

We have players now that are literally running into outs when an effective hook slide to the back of the plate could produce a safe call and a run for their team, but it’s not “manly”. In fact, it's the exact opposite of the wussification that they are being accused of. Catchers are also to blame though. Some of these guys are blocking the plate without the ball, they have to "protect this house"

I'm not for this rule, but I do think something has to change.

What I do love about this conversation is how those against it always bring out the “slippery-slope” argument. If we do this, it’s just a hop-skip-jump to virtual bases and imaginary fences. Sometimes a rule change is just a rule change.

[KJ Duke]

What I do love about this conversation is how those against it always bring out the “slippery-slope” argument. If we do this, it’s just a hop-skip-jump to virtual bases and imaginary fences. Sometimes a rule change is just a rule change.

Very true. But look no further than instant replay in support of slippery slope. This group of owners/agents/MLB officials have no trouble with slippery slope, they'd very likely go much further right now with safety rules if they could they could get away it.

[DOUGHBOYS]

What I do love about this conversation is how those against it always bring out the “slippery-slope” argument. If we do this, it’s just a hop-skip-jump to virtual bases and imaginary fences. Sometimes a rule change is just a rule change.

A roll of the eyes is always made when what could happen in the future, or even what is, arguments are made.
If it isn't seen, it can't be.
The world looks flat. It must be flat. Till it's not.
The play at the plate was never a thought of being taken away. Until this generation.
We have a hard time envisioning what the slippery slope brings.
Until then, it's easier just to roll eyes and scoff.

[Brock]

What about the neighborhood play? What about on a sac fly the throw comes in on the 1st base side of the plate so the catcher has to dive to make the tag where maybe he gets spiked in the wrist and needs surgery. Perhaps during that dive the runner slides into his shin guard and tears something. Baseball has been around a long time and certainly the game would survive just fine without these safety rule changes. One thing we haven't seen is old timers interviewed on this subject. I've always held the tradition and baseball records sacred which is why I still think Maris holds the season hr record and Aaron the all time record. Leave the game alone…it's just fine.

[Navel Lint]

What I do love about this conversation is how those against it always bring out the “slippery-slope” argument. If we do this, it’s just a hop-skip-jump to virtual bases and imaginary fences. Sometimes a rule change is just a rule change.

A roll of the eyes is always made when what could happen in the future, or even what is, arguments are made.
If it isn't seen, it can't be.
The world looks flat. It must be flat. Till it's not.
The play at the plate was never a thought of being taken away. Until this generation.
We have a hard time envisioning what the slippery slope brings.
Until then, it's easier just to roll eyes and scoff.

Maybe you're right. Maybe THIS RULE is the slippery-slope rule that was foretold to us 50+ years ago when our fathers talked about the old days before those pussy players started wearing batting helmets.