Shouldn't someone on the Nats staff have known the interference rules?

[Truconfidence]

The XM guys pointed out as well that the Nats also failed to challenge the Cubs' catcher blocking the plate in the first inning leading to Turner getting called out at home.  Phillips thought the Nats would have had a pretty good chance of success.

theres is no blocking the plate rule on infield grounders i thought.

[Natsinpwc]

theres is no blocking the plate rule on infield grounders i thought.

Is that you Dusty?

[Ray D]

theres is no blocking the plate rule on infield grounders i thought.

Doesn't matter where the ball is coming from, infield or outfield. In the old days a catcher was taught to block the plate while waiting for the ball then when he gets the ball tag the runner. It was illegal then as it is now,  the difference is, in the old days it was never enforce.  The difference is, now it's enforced.  If a catcher has the ball in hand, he can block the plate and tag the runner for the out.

[shoeshineboy]

Trea should have been told by Henley to wait until he saw the ball get through the infield, since he was being held by 3Bman. That was a fail. Weiters knew the rule. The ball should have been declared dead. Reviewing wouldn't have changed it because the umps said that while they know Weiters was hit, in their judgement it didn't matter because it was a wild pitch. That isn't how the letter of the rule is written, but the MLB rule book has some inconsistencies. If there is actaully an in game appeal to the MLB rules committee that is allowable, then I guess they should have appealed for that. But I thought they just had replay reviews. That wouldn't have shown anything differently. They needed a rule clarification.

[Ray D]

If there is actaully an in game appeal to the MLB rules committee that is allowable,

According to Joe Torre (who I would consider an authority) they could have requested rule review which would have gone to New York and would have been ruled upon on the spot.

  An appeal is different from a rule review but what I understand is that it is treated differently for a playoff game: it too has to be ruled upon on the spot (as opposed to the regular season when it can take weeks).   Torre didn't address this, so I have no authority, however at least one commentator has mentioned this (with a sense of authority).

[varoadking]

It's not an issue if Max doesn't choke...

[Scraps]

>>” shouldn’t someone on the Nats staff have known the interference rules?”

Of course they should have!!!

I’ll always remember the excitement of being named a young high school baseball  head coach for the first time. The first thing i felt the need to do was get a “rule book” and read it cover to cover repeatedly  until I knew it like the back of my hand.
As a head baseball coach / manager of a team (all levels) I was always in fear of not having an answer to a  question from one of my players/students about a situation or rule of the game. How can you expect your players to respect you as a mentor, instructor, teacher, leader / manager  if you don’t even know the fn rules of the game???? There’s waaaaay more to it than just making out the lineup card.

Baker clearly wasn’t sure of the rule and likely didn’t push the issue because he was probably thinking “had Wieters done the right thing and blocked the dam# ball I wouldn’t be out here begging for such a lame call”. Lame or not had Baker known the rules of the game he should have been out there pushing the issue until it was reviewed.

Before big games I would always remind myself and  told my players to “leave no regrets on that field”.

Our Washington Nationals have wasted so many opportunities and piled up so many regrets over the past 5 years  I don’t even know how they can stand-up during the national anthem with the weight of that gorilla on their back. It really is sad and my heart aches for all the players that will carry those regrets with them until the day they die.

Guess we’ll have to get ‘em next year.