There's still offseason work to do on home-plate collision rule
Stephen Drew had a choice.
He could have hit Rays catcher Ryan Hanigan Tuesday night on the controversial play at home plate in the fifth inning of the Yankees’ 4-3 loss to the Rays.
Rule 7.13 remains too ambiguous, even after the clarification that baseball issued to the clubs Tuesday. But the rule, from the beginning, has permitted the runner to collide with the catcher if the catcher is blocking home plate. That is what Drew should have done.
For all the Yankees’ complaints afterward, the “out” call on Drew was correct – left fielder Matt Joyce’s throw beat Drew to the plate by a sufficient margin. The clarification essentially instructs umpires not to call a runner safe on a technicality if the runner would have been out regardless.
The common-sense application should eliminate some of the ridiculous calls produced by 7.13. Each ruling, though, still amounts to a subjective judgment. When a runner is out by 10 feet, the call is easy. But at what point would be a catcher actually be hindering or impeding a runner’s progress? That will remain subject to debate.
The rule has achieved its desired effect, virtually eliminating egregious home-plate collisions. The clarification should achieve its desired effect, too, eliminating truly dumb calls. But it’s a good bet that 7.13 still will spark postseason controversy regardless.
Only in the offseason, after another round of discussions, can baseball achieve true clarity, if true clarity with this rule is possible at all.
