I GUESS CATCHERS CAN'T PROTECT THE PLATE ANYMORE?

 

Above is a photo of the famous home plate collision between Pete Rose and Ray Fosse back in the All-Star game in 1970.  The difference was it was an All-Star game, not the regular season and in a game like that, the debate continues as to whether or not Rose went in too hard. But Rose was a competitor and that's how players are made. Ray Fosse is still bitter about the collision, read HERE.  But now, years later, something is changing in major league baseball. Not following? Keep reading...

With two home plate collisions during the ALCS, one that resulted in Alex Avila suffering a strained patellar tendon, the topic of safety has come to the forefront. More specifically the topic of home-plate collisions. Safety has been a big issue in the NFL in recent years. With information on concussions, and the cost of lawsuits they are now facing, it seems the safety conscience approach has trickled down to baseball.

In a report in ESPN (HERE), Tigers team official commented on the David Ross/Avila collision that resulted in injury for Avila saying "Ross did nothing wrong, because that's how everybody expects that play to go. But there is no place [in the game] to be raising an elbow into somebody's head or neck to knock the ball out. It's just dumb [for baseball]." I understand the sentiment. Home-plate collisions are dangerous. The result is injuries to catcher, including harmful concussions. It's serious, and scary, and we want our players to be safe, healthy, and uninjured. But the truth is, it is part of the game.

 

Most of these collisions are due to a runner trying to beat out a throw, and a catcher protecting the game. It's unfortunate, but it happens. Granted, purposely elbowing a catcher is unacceptable. You should never purposely put another athletes safety on the line. There is no reason for it. But to ban collisions? It leaves me to question what the rule will be. Are catchers expected to sit back and allow runs to score in order to avoid being injured? What happens in those cases where that one run does make the difference between a win, and a loss? The general idea is that one saved run is not worth the money invested on the players involved. Several people, including Jim Leyland, who sits on Bud Selig's advisory committee, think the play is unnecessary. They are calling for a change.

Do I think there needs to be rules against purposely taking actions that result in an injury? Of course I do! It's bad sportsmanship. But baseball is a sport. It is physical, and injuries are inevitable. That is why athletes have such strict work out routines. To build up muscle to be able to handle the physicality of their careers. And yes, that sometimes includes collisions, especially in the catchers position. It should have never been a matter of "if" a player gets injured, but "when" a player gets injured. We cannot wrap athletes up in bubble wrap.

At the end of the day, I want to see fewer injuries, but to ban home plate collisions are a little excessive to me. Yes, make it so that you cannot purposely injure the player. But a catchers job is to protect that plate, the way a runners job is to score that run. Why penalize these guys for doing their jobs? What is next? Banning outfielders from making jump catches at the wall, because the impact against the wall is dangerous? That padding isn't nearly enough to keep those guys safe. Or maybe we should ban running the bases altogether. You know running isn't really safe. One of those guys can trip and fall. Everyone should just walk from third to home, and positional players should just walk to catch the ball for an out.

Find a way to make players safer, that isn't ridiculous, and doesn't ruin the game.

--Erica Morales BYB Senior Writer
Twitter: @e_morales1804



The Bleeding Yankee Blue store is opened! CLICK HERE TO START SHOPPING! Also, follow me on Twitter @BleednYankeeBlu and join the group Bleeding Yankee Blue (Official) on Facebook, just type it in.