MLB collision rule needs to be simplified after coming into spotlight again

Two plays this week underscore the problems with the complex way MLB is choosing to interpret the home plate collision rule.

On Tuesday night, Rangers catcher Jonah Heim was found to have blocked the plate illegally in a manner that cost Texas its game against the Chicago White Sox. One night later, San Diego Padres catcher Gary Sanchez was found guilty of the same violation against the San Francisco Giants.

In both cases, the runner was initially called out by the plate umpire only to have that decision reversed on appeal due to the collision rule.

The plays in two different MLB games were different in their structures, and that’s important.

In the Tuesday collision, Heim awaits the throw from left field with one foot on the plate, but set back about six inches so as to at least arguably give runner Elvis Andrus a lane. He does not actually catch the ball, however, until Andrus has already begun his slide, and that appears to be the fact MLB relied on in finding that Heim illegally obstructed Andrus’ path to the plate.

In the Wednesday collision, the Giants held a 1-0 lead in the fifth inning as Giants catcher Blake Sabol tried to score on Joc Pederson’s hit to right only to be called out on a throw by Fernando Tatis Jr. The video makes clear that the throw from Tatis drew Sanchez several feet up the third base line.

But there were two key and controversial elements to the play. The first was that as Sanchez set up to receive the throw from Tatis he adopted a position directly in front of home plate. But the second is that, by the instant Sanchez actually gained possession of the ball (and, in fact, for the entire visible portion of Sabol’s run home), he had chosen a lane near the foul side, almost on the grass.

That running lane forced him to veer back toward the fair portion of the field in order to reach the plate, and that meant a course right back toward Sanchez. It’s also noteworthy that when Sanchez caught the ball, Sabol had not yet reached the cutout area around home, which is generally the demarcation area for when obstruction can be called.

Both affected managers, Bruce Bochy of the Rangers and Bob Melvin of the Padres, were ejected.

The essential problem is that MLB has muddied the interpretative waters concerning home plate collisions. What needs to happen is for the game to return to the simple rule that originally governed play: You can’t block the plate without the ball, but you can block it with the ball.

Some time in the late 1960s or thereabouts, probably out of a desire to win at all costs, MLB inadvertently got away from this understanding. There is no better illustration of this than the memorable play concluding the 1970 All-Star game in Cincinnati when Pete Rose barreled over catcher Ray Fosse to score the winning run.

In the immediate aftermath, there was substantial debate concerning whether Rose’s takeout of Fosse (who suffered a separated shoulder) was fair or dirty play on Rose’s part. But it was not until many years later (when Buster Posey was seriously injured on a similar play) that the collision rule was written.

What nobody points out about the Rose-Fosse play was that, at the time Rose barreled into Fosse, the catcher was illegally blocking the plate without the ball. He was, at the most basic level, obstructing Rose’s attempt to score, and he paid a huge price for doing so.

The Posey play, which occurred during a 2015 game against the Marlins, was similar but not as blatant. On that play, Posey sets up on the right side of home plate (his left foot blocking the plate) and waits for a throw on a sacrifice fly while the runner, Scott Cousins, races home. The video shows that Posey’s glove contacts the ball before Cousins reaches the slide area, but (and this is critical) Posey never actually possesses the ball.

For his part, Cousins — having seemingly decided that the throw will beat him home — sets a direct course for Posey, colliding with him shoulder first as the ball slides away. It’s clear from the video that the runner’s intent was not to touch home but to separate Posey from the ball; in fact, even though he fell across home plate after the collision, Cousins went back to touch home on the assumption that he had not already done so.

MLB needs to return to basics on the collision rule: You can’t block home (or any other base for that matter) unless you have the ball in your possession. And once you do possess the ball, all’s fair. By that interpretation:

1. Heim would have been ruled to have obstructed Andrus because he did not have possession of the ball at the instant the runner started his slide.

2. The “out” call on Sabol would have been upheld because Sanchez possessed the ball before Sabol was in position to begin his slide, making the catcher’s blocking of the base perfectly legal.

3. There would have been no debate about the 1970 Rose All-Star game play because Fosse never possessed the ball when he tried to block the plate.

The Cousins-Posey play is the only ambiguous one, and it’s only ambiguous because at the time there was no rule covering Cousins’ behavior in diving into Posey — who was only partially blocking the base — rather than sliding for the exposed portion of the plate itself.