11/21/24
June 03, 2011
Giants GM Bitter About Cousins: San Francisco Giants general manager Brian Sabean continues to complain about the home plate collision by Florida Marlins player Scott Cousins that seriously injured Giants catcher Buster Posey. "If I never hear from Cousins again or he never plays another game in the big leagues, I think we'll all be happy," Sabean said.
Why can't Cousins be blamed? I'm not talking death threats. But, he hurt Posey while he was intentionally trying to take him out. I'm not in favor of death threats, but I am in favor of some grief for it. Plus, a rule change is also in order. The chances of getting a rule change unless you keep it in the news isn't great though.
posted by bperk at 02:28 PM on June 03, 2011
Why is Brian Sabean always getting his mug in the paper, that's my question. Stupid loudmouth.
posted by yerfatma at 02:42 PM on June 03, 2011
Why rip Cousins when what he did is common practice in the MLB? I don't like his strategy and would like to see the game eliminate it, but his agent is right to say the Giants would have called the same play hard-nosed baseball if their guy did it.
posted by rcade at 02:46 PM on June 03, 2011
Why can't Cousins be blamed?
I'm not saying he can't be upset at Cousins. I'd feel the same. But he's missing the big picture. If he wants revenge, great: concentrate on one player. If he wants to make sure this doesn't happen again, to his catcher or someone else's, his anger would be better off directed elsewhere.
posted by justgary at 03:00 PM on June 03, 2011
But, he hurt Posey while he was intentionally trying to take him out.
No, Posey got hurt while being taken out.
It's semantics, but it's important. If Posey doesn't plant as awkwardly as he does, no one gets hurt. It wasn't like Cousins aimed for Posey's leg, or gave Posey a concussion.
That said, Cousins didn't NEED to run over Posey.
posted by grum@work at 04:22 PM on June 03, 2011
Why rip Cousins when what he did is common practice in the MLB?
Collisions at home plate are common practice. Is going out of your way to make contact when the catcher isn't blocking the plate common practice?
Sabean should definitely focus on the big picture. I was thinking that this is part of his strategy to keep the pressure on for a rule change. Or maybe it's not. I don't know.
posted by bperk at 04:22 PM on June 03, 2011
But, he hurt Posey while he was intentionally trying to take him out.
No, Posey got hurt while being taken out.
Cousins didn't accidentally run into Posey. He was going for the big collision. It would have been great if Posey was readied for such a hit and could have avoided injury, but he wasn't. If you intentionally hit someone, you can't claim that you didn't mean to break his/her nose.
posted by bperk at 04:42 PM on June 03, 2011
Related: my local paper had a quick Q&A with Johnny Bench in today's edition that touched on the Posey incident a bit.
Were you surprised that there was such an outcry about home-plate collisions after San Francisco Giants star catcher Buster Posey's season-ending leg and ankle injury last week?Also, Johnny is 63 and has a 21-month old? No wonder his hips are shot.Buster was a finalist for the Johnny Bench Award (as the top collegiate catcher in 2008) and is a great kid - I called him after the World Series last year. When I heard about the injury, I was anxious to see how this happened. Buster put himself in such a bad position. First of all, my catchers don't sit in front of home plate. They stand away from home plate and work back to the plate. But we (catchers) are just fair game. You've got a guy running around third base at 210 to 220 pounds with 3 percent body fat and with sprinter's speed. I teach my kids to stay away from the plate when you don't have the ball so the runner actually sees home plate and his thought is, slide. But Buster is laying in front of home plate, and it's like having a disabled car in the middle of a four-lane highway. You're just going to get smacked. Show them the plate. You can always catch the ball and step, or step and catch the ball, as long as you've got the runner on the ground. And if you have the runner on the ground, there's less chance of any severe collision.
posted by Ufez Jones at 05:23 PM on June 03, 2011
But Buster is laying in front of home plate, and it's like having a disabled car in the middle of a four-lane highway. You're just going to get smacked. Show them the plate.
Love me some Johnny Bench. That said, he makes no sense. Here's a screen capture at the exact moment Cousins starts his move to run over Posey. You can even see his shoulders turn slightly. Posey isn't laying in front the plate, and the plate is clearly visible to the runner.
I agree with grum. Posey was awkward during the play. But he wasn't blocking the plate. He certainly wasn't laying down in front of the plate.
posted by justgary at 06:52 PM on June 03, 2011
Maybe I haven't been watching enough baseball lately, but when did it suddenly become acceptable, tolerated, or encouraged to lower your shoulder and drive it into the catcher at full ramming speed? What has this sport become where this is acceptable behavior?
posted by evixir at 10:06 PM on June 03, 2011
If you intentionally hit someone, you can't claim that you didn't mean to break his/her nose.
I think that's a stretch. I do not think for one second that Cousins meant to break Posey's ankle. Did Swisher intend to break Nishioka's leg? I don't think so. Runners from third take out catchers every now and then, runners going into second take out SS/2nd basemen every now and then, it's part of the pro game. If Sabean doesn't like the current rules, work to change it. Don't throw out garbage like this.
Gary, I know you're not changing your view point at this stage, but in this picture taken from behind, Posey hasn't started his move to the plate yet. Watch the video again, after he catches the ball (well, after he tries to catch the ball) he moves back into the plate. It almost looks like his dropping the ball caused him to let up a bit and not move aggressively into Cousins for a tag. NFL receivers are often injured that way, they drop the ball, and let up, but the defender doesn't anticipate the drop so they still hit full force. Not sure if that changes anything, but Posey is definitely moving toward the line, which is what Cousins expected the whole time. Bench wants his catchers a bit further out from home, so give them more room to avoid this collision.
posted by dviking at 11:33 PM on June 03, 2011
when did it suddenly become acceptable, tolerated, or encouraged to lower your shoulder and drive it into the catcher at full ramming speed?
Suddenly it becomes all of those when you know the throw beat you to the plate.
But he wasn't blocking the plate.
He really wasn't blocking the plate but Cousins feet never really leave the base line. He lowers his shoulder because he knows there is going to be contact, Posey sure as hell turned right into it. I mean, the poor sap turned assuming the runner was sliding. Ouch. I blame the third base coach. That was an awful shallow ball to tag up on.
posted by tselson at 11:38 PM on June 03, 2011
Posey hasn't started his move to the plate yet.
Agreed. But the runner is already starting the move to run him over. He's not preparing to slide. So before the runner knew what Posey was doing, he was deciding not to slide, but to run him over.
but Posey is definitely moving toward the line
Yep, he is: for the tag. Again, my point is that the runner decided he was going to run the catcher over before he had any idea what Posey was doing. I'm guessing he thought he might be out so he needed to knock the ball out of his glove.
Bench wants his catchers a bit further out from home, so give them more room to avoid this collision.
How far away? Two feet? Then do a swipe tag? Maybe with today's rules that's what's necessary to keep from getting run over, but I don't think that's a great situation. I don't think a catcher that's not blocking the plate should be run over. For me, the gray area is when a runner 'believes' the catcher WILL block the plate and decides to run over the catcher. I can see the problem there, because if Posey catches the ball cleanly, then turns and sits in front of the plate, the runner (had he decided to slide) would be dead in the water.
But my problem with Bench's comment is saying Posey is laying over the plate. That's not remotely the truth.
but Cousins feet never really leave the base line.
For me that's the whole discussion. You can hit a catcher that's not blocking the plate and still stay in the base line. If he had gone outside the base line, to me, that's an easy call.
posted by justgary at 12:03 AM on June 04, 2011
Maybe I haven't been watching enough baseball lately, but when did it suddenly become acceptable, tolerated, or encouraged to lower your shoulder and drive it into the catcher at full ramming speed? What has this sport become where this is acceptable behavior?
Well, it's been happening at least since 1970.
And let's be a bit honest about things, there are worse ways to break up the play at the plate.
posted by grum@work at 12:47 AM on June 04, 2011
Again, my point is that the runner decided he was going to run the catcher over before he had any idea what Posey was doing.
Runners have to decide quickly what they're going to do based on when they expect the ball to arrive and what the catcher is doing. They either slide to avoid the catcher and a tag or bowl them over. Both of them are accepted baseball practice at the moment. I don't fault Cousins for Posey's injury. I fault the rules of the game.
posted by rcade at 11:34 AM on June 04, 2011
my point is that the runner decided he was going to run the catcher over before he had any idea what Posey was doing
My only disagreement with that is that Cousins has every reason to believe that Posey will be turning into him once he catches the ball. He wasn't incorrect in that thinking.
Does anyone else think that Posey lets up a bit once he realizes he doesn't have the ball?
Go back and watch the video, watching on the shot from the center field camera. To me it looks like he turns as to tag Cousins, but never really raises his glove for the tag, as he knows he's dropped the ball. Surest way to get hurt in a collision play is to give the other player all the momentum. Just seems like he stops.
Absolutely not trying to say it's Posey's fault, I think the injury was a result of an aggressive, but within the rules, runner and an unfortunate set by the catcher (ankle turned under like it was).
Change the rule to outlaw these collisions, don't make comments wishing a player's career to be over.
posted by dviking at 12:18 PM on June 04, 2011
I fault the rules of the game.
Well, of course. Now tell me the rule change. I see two choices:
1. The catcher can not block the plate, so the runner can not run the catcher over. That's the easy rule change. It fundamentally changes baseball. I don't see it happening.
2. The runner can only run over the catcher if he's blocking the plate. Sounds great. We'll accept that it's up to the umpire to decide IF the catcher is blocking the plate.
But wait:
...Cousins has every reason to believe that Posey will be turning into him once he catches the ball
...Runners have to decide quickly what they're going to do based on when they expect the ball to arrive and what the catcher is doing.
In a previous thread I said the runner made the 'assumption' that Posey was going to block the plate. He made that assumption very early in the play, as the ball was arriving. And I think it's also likely Posey, once he had trouble with the ball, assumed he wouldn't be run over. It's a recipe for disaster.
If the runner had decided to slide, but Posey picks the ball cleanly and then dives in front of the plate, he's a dead duck.
So I agree. But saying we need a rule change is the easy part. If the rule baseball needed to solve the problem was clear, I think you'd see it implemented quickly. But it's not.
posted by justgary at 03:06 PM on June 04, 2011
I should add that I think Bench's advice is great. He knows the topic as well as anyone. But players make mistakes in the heat of the moment, and throws are not perfect. His advice would help catchers, but wouldn't solve the problem.
posted by justgary at 03:16 PM on June 04, 2011
It fundamentally changes baseball.
A catcher could be prohibited from blocking the plate before he catches the ball (this may already be the case). He also could be prohibited from blocking any part of the plate in foul territory, giving the runner half of it to slide at. A runner could be called out for intentionally striking a catcher who is not blocking the plate.
From the MLB rules: "The catcher, without the ball in his possession, has no right to block the pathway of the runner attempting to score. The base line belongs to the runner and the catcher should be there only when he is fielding a ball or when he already has the ball in his hand."
Looking back at the Posey hit, he wasn't blocking the plate. So under my suggestions Cousins would've been called out for intentionally hitting him.
Is it really fundamental to baseball that catchers completely block the plate? I don't think they did that until their padding became better in recent decades.
posted by rcade at 04:31 PM on June 04, 2011
I don't think they did that until their padding became better in recent decades.
Well, it looks like they were doing it back in the 1920s (see my photo link).
posted by grum@work at 05:17 PM on June 04, 2011
A catcher could be prohibited from blocking the plate before he catches the ball (this may already be the case). He also could be prohibited from blocking any part of the plate in foul territory, giving the runner half of it to slide at. A runner could be called out for intentionally striking a catcher who is not blocking the plate.
Looking back at the Posey hit, he wasn't blocking the plate. So under my suggestions Cousins would've been called out for intentionally hitting him.
But as you already said:
Runners have to decide quickly what they're going to do based on when they expect the ball to arrive and what the catcher is doing.
The runner decided to run Posey over. Posey never blocked the plate. But the runner thought he was going to.
The rule sounds great. But it turns everything into a guessing game for the runner.
posted by justgary at 07:55 PM on June 04, 2011
The decision-making process of the runner will change if he might be called out for ramming the catcher away from the plate. Under current rules, what incentive was there for Cousins not to ram Posey?
posted by rcade at 08:33 PM on June 04, 2011
There is nothing in the rule book to prevent a runner from hitting a catcher. That's that! At the same time, there's nothing in the rule book to prevent a catcher from applying a hard tag to the face of a runner. Suppose this happened, where would be the outcry for a rules change? Would a catcher who applied multiple face fractures to a runner be subject to the same criticism that Cousins is in this case? My thought is that a catcher takes his chances blocking the plate, and a runner takes his chances trying to ram a catcher. One or the other, or both, could be injured, and that's the hazard of the game.
posted by Howard_T at 09:01 PM on June 04, 2011
Well said Howard.
Anyone that thinks making it mandatory that runners slide into home and/or outlawing catchers from blocking the plate will eliminate injuries is guilty of wishful thinking.
As I've said before: Runners from third take out catchers every now and then, runners going into second take out SS/2nd basemen every now and then, it's part of the pro game.
I don't think we really want to change the game at this point. Posey's injury was a fluke caused by the awkward way his ankle was turned under when he got hit.
posted by dviking at 09:54 PM on June 04, 2011
Under current rules, what incentive was there for Cousins not to ram Posey?
So let's say we change the rules, and the ball reaches home before the runner. The catcher isn't blocking the plate, so the runner prepares to slide. As he starts his slide the catcher takes a half step and puts his leg down in front of the plate. There's nothing the runner can do, because he's already started the slide.
It may seem like I'm playing a game of gotcha. All I'm saying is that the rule works well in black and white situation. But that's not reality.
My thought is that a catcher takes his chances blocking the plate, and a runner takes his chances trying to ram a catcher.
Chances? I'll take the runner hitting the catcher at full speed while the catcher isn't blocking the plate. I bet I'll win 99 percent of the time.
runners going into second take out SS/2nd basemen every now and then, it's part of the pro game.
Have the runners no longer slide but instead hit the fielder, with no protection, like a linebacker hitting a quarter back. See if the injuries go up. Apples and oranges.
Anyone that thinks making it mandatory that runners slide into home and/or outlawing catchers from blocking the plate will eliminate injuries is guilty of wishful thinking.
Who is this 'anyone' that claims it would eliminate injuries? I don't seem them in this thread.
posted by justgary at 11:08 PM on June 04, 2011
I don't think we really want to change the game at this point. Posey's injury was a fluke caused by the awkward way his ankle was turned under when he got hit.
By the way dviking, I basically agree with you. I don't think a rule change is the thing to do. And I think a number of circumstances came together to create this situation, or as you call it, a fluke. But that's one of the reasons (a guy not blocking the plate gets run over) I think the play has been , and should be discussed.
posted by justgary at 10:12 PM on June 05, 2011
Who is this 'anyone' that claims it would eliminate injuries? I don't seem them in this thread.
One, where did I say that others in this thread said that?
Two, what would be the point of requiring slides if it wasn't to reduce injuries?
(okay, I said eliminate, hopefully your drawers aren't on that tight that you're arguing reducing/eliminate)
Have the runners no longer slide but instead hit the fielder, with no protection, like a linebacker hitting a quarter back. See if the injuries go up. Apples and oranges.
Honestly, I have no idea what you're getting at with that comment. Second basemen don't have pads, and they're trying to make a throw (thus in a vulnerable position). So, yes, full contact at second is going to raise injuries. Of course, if second basemen start setting up like a catcher in front of second base when a runner is trying to steal 2nd, we're going to see some collisions that will not be the fault of the runner. 2nd basemen and short stops don't tend to do that...maybe catchers should pay attention???
I guess the real difference between how you and I view this particular play is in how much of the plate a catcher has to block before he's at least partially guilty of causing the collision. Even in your freeze frame that distorts the situation due to being shot from quite a ways behind the plate you can see that Posey blocks some of the plate. Cousins knows the catcher is going to come back toward the plate once he catches the throw. He decides he has the best chance of scoring by going through the catcher rather than around him. We'll never know if the collision was needed as Posey never caught the ball before the collision. MLB did not take any action against Cousins, and that says a lot to me. I think they take some action if Posey had truly been 100% clear of the plate.
If you don't think Posey's set up adds to the situation, think of it this way. Imagine a 1st baseman setting up to receive throws from the infield with his foot positioned in front of 1/5th of 1st base. The runner has a lot of the plate to aim for, but there would still be collisions from time to time, and the 1st baseman would lose most of those collisions. Either the catcher truly clears the line, or they're going to take some hits.
posted by dviking at 09:02 PM on June 06, 2011
One, where did I say that others in this thread said that?
If no one said it, why are you using it as an element of your argument?
okay, I said eliminate, hopefully your drawers aren't on that tight that you're arguing reducing/eliminate
It has nothing to do with anything but wanting you not to misrepresent my point. There is a world of difference between reducing an eliminating. Would requiring runners to slide into home reduce injuries. Yes, no question. Eliminate, no way. So we're not talking semantics here. We're talking the difference between what I believe and what I don't believe.
Honestly, I have no idea what you're getting at with that comment.
That comparing what happens around second base and home plate is pointless.
Even in your freeze frame that distorts the situation due to being shot from quite a ways behind the plate you can see that Posey blocks some of the plate.
You keep saying this like it's some truth. The pictures does NOT distort the play. It shows that Posey was in front of SOME of the plate. Exactly as you said. You can draw a line straight from the runner to the plate without Posey in the middle. That's not distortion.
MLB did not take any action against Cousins, and that says a lot to me.
Because it means your right?
We're going in circles. I never said MLB should do anything to the runner. I already said I didn't think a new rule was needed. I already said that we basically agree. But, again, I think it's an interesting play, and I promise you MLB, though doing nothing, looked at that play over and over and discussed any possible way to protect catchers that, no fault of the runner, are not blocking the plate.
But you're more interested in being right, even when there is no 'right'. There's just discussion. But whatever.
posted by justgary at 11:58 AM on June 07, 2011
It shows that Posey was in front of SOME of the plate
Good, glad you see it that way, your prior posts on this thread and the other made me think you thought Posey was completely out in front of the plate. In many of your prior posts you clearly state that you think Posey was not blocking the plate. Clearly, he was blocking at least some of the plate. Does that mean he should automatically be bowled over? No, but it does put him in harm's way, thus he bears some of the cause of the collision. He doesn't want to get hit, move up like Bench suggests. BTW, that freeze frame most certainly distorts the view as it is two dimensional and shot from behind. A shot from the side would give a better view of how much of the plate Posey is blocking. And, it also backs up your view more than it should because it was taken prior to Posey moving back into the line. If you had a freeze frame from just prior to the collision it would show Posey blocking more of the plate.
Because it means your right?
No, because it means that MLB does not think anything outside of the rules occurred. If Posey had not been at all in front of the plate, they probably would have taken some action.
I'm more interested in being right??? Well, yeah, we disagree and I'm stating my case, so be it.
posted by dviking at 10:41 PM on June 07, 2011
I think the collision is a great time to talk about the rules, both written and unwritten. But blaming Cousins isn't the answer.