The worst call in MLB history is the not-even-close play at first base which cost Detroit Tigers pitcher Armando Galarraga a perfect game in June 2010.
@@ericwilliams398 I immediately thought the same thing when I saw the clip title. The perfect game call was like stealing a guy's winning lotto ticket.
The rule is, The catcher can not block the plate PRIOR to recieving the ball. The catcher doesnt have the ball and is in front of the plate which is why the call was made. If he impedes the runner then the runner is safe. It is a horrible rule that has since been recognized, and now umpires do a better job at analyzing the situation as it unfolds
samiswhoa have you ever played baseball??? do you know your arms only have a limited reach and if you want to catch the ball you have to move in front of it!!! human being arent really like the rubber guy in the fantastic four. you see the catcher looking down at the plate to know where he is (5:45) the as the ball approaches he moves towards the ball to catch it.
that ,my brother ,is a FACT ,im a yank fan so the call didnt effect my season BUT it effec ted me to the extent that if ,like you just did ,lol,mentions ANY error being bad or missed ,etc that is and will be FOREVER # 1,even ryte NOW my adrenaline is pumpin so high feel like snapping the keyboard ,lolol
im not sure of the teams larry BUT it was a perfect game ,no one was on base ,im talking about the game when the ump who called the runner safe appolized in tears ,like the next da y ,and i do kbow it was detroit as miggy caught the throw that was an out
+metropod Well, it's all about context. Think about the rule they they're trying to enforce here. It's an interpretation that, in a sense, completely changes the game for lack of a better word. What Jim Joyce did was simply miss a call. Just botched it. Nothing 'changed' per se. Yes, it was awful, but just shows that umpires aren't perfect. This was looked at for a VERY LONG time in New York and they STILL came up with that call? INSANE.
+Fleagle the Command center crew relies on the footage from the TV cameras and admittedly, the catcher's foot was blocking the plate before he caught the ball. Joyce was standing feet from the bag when he screwed up, and anyone with the gift of sight could tell that was an out.
John Smith The rule also says you can't block the plate when you don't have the ball, but when you're playing the ball you can. He starts with the plate completely open and only steps into the path when he's playing the ball
***** The runner is not required to slide the catcher is required to tag the runner on a non force out, the controversy stems from the new rule that the catcher must provide a lane for the runner to touch the plate if the catcher doesn't have possession of the ball. I do not like the rule and think the interpretation of it is fuzzy at best. but no where at any base is a runner ever required to slide that is not a rule.
Mar218100 No the runner is not required to slide however in certain cases such as a double play if the runner gets hit with the ball coming from second to first, if the runner at first would have been out it is declared a runner interference.
EET FUK yeah like wtf how was he safe he got tagged the catcher moved legally he was not blocking home plate and plus the runner never touched home plate
I guess im just going to haft to go be an umpire and say when i see that call "well there was this gaming in 2014 that this happened and they called him safe without touching home plate." and then eject the coach when he tells me that its bullshit
But he's right tho in everything he said. It's the Marlins network he's a fan and he works for the organization so he has the right to be pissed off. As a baseball lover if you weren't pissed off after watching this video you don't respect the game enough lol
omg... I wanted to bitch slap the announcer... that was a god call... I'm not for either team... it was a good call... clearly the catcher was blocking the path
They made the correct call. The announcers are clueless. They even read it the rule that explains why he should be safe, and then acted all surprised when he was.
Yep, I agree. Rewarded by umping National League games afterwards.I guess because of the backlash. One of the worst umps I've ever seen.Jerry Meals is another bad one.
There's 2 kinds of sports people. 1) - Book people who believe 1 sentence can cover eeeeeevery possibilty. 2) - Common sense people who use their eyes and multiple factors before deciding. You want to know what's wrong with sports in general these days? ... Every player in every sport trying to become an Oscar nominee by exploiting the rule book and over-officiating to get a call from the ref and/or ump. I will hand it to baseball (and even hockey) however, their umps don't mess up perfectly good games like the refs of the NBA & NFL. Almost every NBA & NFL game is decided by calls. If you're a nerdy calculator loving geek .... you probably think he's safe, cause afterall, a rules a rule right? If you're a human being ... dude was out by 10 feet and just the fact that he pulled up like a chump and immediatly started acting like a child who was told it's time for bed .... you think he's out. IMO
You are right about everything. This guy is out. Aside from not being a fan of this new rule, the fact of the matter is that he moved towards the runner to get the ball. The throw took him in that direction. But he wasn't blocking the plate anyway.
That's stupid too, the rule should be, " if the runner plows into the catcher then the runner is out" that's it. Because all they want to Do is stop collisions. Its their option weather to slide or just give themselves up.
Mar218100 whether its been tweaked or not they would still look to see if he was blocking. but yes. its a more chasing the throw friendly version this year which should theoretically stop arguments. "theoretically"
Lol . “This call will change the game of baseball forever”.... 2018 and this call has long been forgotten. And, absolutely NOTHING has changed. Relax announcer guy
5 лет назад
Cold Snap if that were true you would see it being exploited, I think this was a bad call but it didn’t mess up the game. The only part is do you truat Joe Torre saying the catcher is allowed to move? he looks so much mafia that I gotta admit it’s hard 😆
It was a terrible call, and I hope I can offer an explanation that defends Jim Joyce (the best ump, voted by mlb player). Umpires are taught to close their eyes on bang-bang plays at first and listen to the glove catch the ball and the foot hit the bag. This is because on plays that close, your eyes will decieve you and create indecisiveness in your brain, which is the last thing an umpire needs. What happened was, it was a soft throw and it was hard to hear the catch, so when Joyce heard Gallaraga's foot stomp down on the bag in excitement of throwing a perfect game, he thought it was the runners foot and called him safe because he never heard the ball hit the glove. Even though he was out by a lot, it was too close for Joyce to realize his mistake and change the call directly after (which is allowed). It really sucks, hopefully at least you can understand why and have some sympathy for the umpire.
GingerJesus28 If I can slightly teak your explanation: Umpires are taught to watch the foot and listen to the ball in the glove, not close your eyes. I'm a huge fan of Joyce (best strike calls in the game IMO) but in that situation unless the runner was clearly safe, he should have called him out. You can even tell by the runners reaction that he knew he was out. But when he apologized that is one of the most ballsy moves I have ever seen. Heck the guy couldn't walk to his mailbox without a police escort from all the death threats
GingerJesus28 ... '' . . . Umpires are taught to close their eyes on bang-bang plays at first and listen to the glove catch the ball and the foot hit the bag . . . ''. Hello ??? !!! ~~~ '' ... taught to close their eyes ... '' ... Are You Nuts ??? !!! ... Please do not be one of those '' Functional Illiterates '' ... [ These Folks are apart of the General Population that Doesn't KNOW what's Happening, AND it Doesn't even Know that it Doesn't KNOW !!! ] ... They do Exist, And to Prove my Point : THEY VOTED FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA ... Enough Said !!! ...
Eric Alexander luckily I never have to listen to him, but I've heard from others how bad he is as well as hearing him in some highlight clips. Just terrible.
Id' PAY to see CHARLIE HUSTLE DO THAT AGAIN. He's done it before. Pete Rose was one the most passionate ball players I ever saw and TOUGH AS NAILS. You just would not want to be on his bad side. I've done trade show circuits with him as a guest autographer and hes as tough as they come!
He didn't have to because he already had it in his mind that he would file a protest and ask that it be reviewed. Plus, he was tagged out before that anyway, so it was immaterial.
That doesn't matter- he's safe due to Catcher Interference. (I think it's a bad call myself) If it's interference, whether he touched the plate doesn't matter)
It does matter, he at least has to make an attempt... if he collides with the catcher then still does not touch the plate then your point would be valid... but that is not what happen
That's not true. If the runner is obstructed by the fielder, the runner doesn't even have to make an attempt, the runner is protected. It's very important to understand the rules of MLB and the consequences of breaking the rules. Also, the runner must "Slide or Avoide Collision" they're not permitted to Pete Rose themselves into the Catcher like they used to be able to do.
New rule on home-plate collisions put into effect 7.13, intended to increase player safety by eliminating "egregious" collisions at home plate was jointly announced by Major League Baseball and the Major League Baseball Players Association on Monday. 7.13.b.The catcher may not block the pathway of a runner attempting to score *unless* he has possession of the ball. c. Runners are not required to slide, and catchers in possession of the ball are allowed to block the plate. However, runners who do slide and catchers who provide the runner with a lane will never be found in violation of the rule.
With the catcher where he was, the runner had three choices: 1 Slide and be blocked (a side would've potentially injured the runner too) 2 plow over the catcher to open up the way to the base (now illegal) or 3 make a case to the umpire that the catcher was in the way The runner did the right thing according to the newest rules. The catcher could have moved toward right field a step or two to open up the lane and make the tag with ease.
I remember watching this game live on TV with my dad when I was young and us both freaking out about how horrible this call was. We aren't even fans of either team, we were just killing an afternoon watching a ballgame.
+LowkeyXTiger never read the rule book but I think obstruction automatically awards you the base you were going to even if you never touched it. But im not sure
It is a bad rule but why are they so upset about him not sliding? He obviously knew he was going to be out so why potentially injure himself or the catcher when the rule says you are not supposed to run into the catcher and the catcher should stay out of the way?
The rules say nothing about sliding into the catcher. As long as you are obviously attempting to get to the plate, you can do more or less whatever you want.
I believe the runner ran around him to try to convince the umpire that the catcher was blocking the plate and that he should be safe. If he slid, it would look like he wasn't blocking the plate, and since the throw would have been a lot earlier than the slide, he would've easily been out.
***** Again, there is NO rule that you must slide. If you're going to spam this page with garbage and lies you're going to hear from me on every post. I repeat, there is NO rule that says you must slide...EVER!! Go read the rules.
Dude. There may not be a rule saying you have to slide. But anybody who has ever played baseball at any level knows that's how you play the game. He knew exactly what he was doing, I mean he practically through his arms up before Mathis even tagged him. I'm not gonna jump on the umpires for making a bad call. It's a new rule , calls like this happen but if you are gonna play baseball play it how it's supposed to be played.
ok he had no lane to slide because the catcher had to move to the 3rd base side of home plate cause if he didnt move, what would happen? he wont catch it, so you get some baseball* iq.
I honestly hate this fuck!ng rule it just messes up the sport! Cosart barely gave effort to slide. Mathis barley blocked the plate. At that moment I would love to be Redmond. 😡😡😬😬 even if your a reds fan you can admit it was an out and credit to Stanton. One of the reasons the Marlins don't have the luck they deserve. I hope this doesn't happen. Screw that rule!! If they remove it, life would be better. Anybody agree??
TheSubmissionChannel well its a made up name that the announcers came up with and also, he did win the challenge, but thats very shallow for a mlb player to do that.
The dude wasn't anywhere close yet, so, when he did get close, guess what? The catcher had possession of the ball. By the way, I'm not a Marlins or reds fans, go Astros!(even though they lose every season 😔)
Matthew Hermes Is there going to be a rule of about how close the runner has to be in feet or seconds before you can be in the base/plate line without possession of the ball? (Even this would not be legit since some players are extremely faster than other players. When are you going to rule it OK or not?) My points are VERY clear... He WAS in the base/plate line BEFORE he had possession of the ball. He WAS FULLY capable of retrieving the ball OUTSIDE of the base line as well. (He had plenty of time to move outside the base/plate line to make the play on the ball WITHOUT being within the base/plate line.) He waited WITHIN the base/plate line for the ball to come to him. Which was NOT necessary to make the play. So, I agree with NY... Make the plays OUTSIDE of the base/plate line and then come WITHIN ONLY with possession of the ball. Then there is NOTHING to argue about. With the new rules catchers are going to have to be more proactive and not lazy waiting on the ball within the base/plate line. It's that simple... :-) P.S. The rule is there to protect the catcher as much as the runner. So they will have to adapt to the new rules and learn to make plays outside of the base/plate line UNTIL they have possession of the ball. Again, I agree with NY. They made the right call. If the runner was only a second or two earlier. The runner would have had no choice but to run into the catcher. (So, he was putting himself and the runner at risk.) If you watch closely. The catcher makes 2 steps from the plate to be in a better position to retrieve the ball. He was FULLY capable of taking 2 more steps infield or outside of the field to be OUTSIDE of the base/plate line to get possession of the ball. He FAILED to do so. So, again, that's why I agree with NY... On another note. The worst call in MLB was when the referee took away that guys Perfect Game at first base. (The guy was out by a mile.) This is no where near the worst call in MLB.
Matthew Hermes No matter where the guy is he can't block the plate until after getting the ball, the issue is that he could have fielded the ball out of the way before moving into it but didn't so he violated the rule.
It was a shitty call, but they Royals would have won that game anyway. The Cards hit, like, .157 in that series. 33 years later and they're still butthurt in St. Louis. The 7th game was hilarious.
Brayden Bernhardt Welcome to the pussified present that we live in, where being passionate about the game “should get you fired”. What the hell is wrong with you? “Mad because he never made it to the majors” yeah, and I bet you’re mad that you never made it out of high school, you dumbass. Go back to the drive-thru window at McDonalds.
Almost as bad as the infamous “infield fly” call against the Braves in the playoffs when the ball was caught clearly in left field, not the infield. Cost the Braves the game
Here's the infield fly rule. An Infield Fly is a fair fly ball (not a line drive or bunt) that, in the judgment of the umpire, can be caught by an infielder, pitcher, or catcher with ordinary effort and when there are runners on first and second or first, second, and third and less than two outs. Notice it doesn't say 'caught in the infield', it says 'caught by an infielder.' They call it on balls in the shallow outfield all the time.
John Bishop. Wrong answer. The infield fly call was 100% the correct call. Show us where the rule says the ball must be caught in the infield. You should learn the rules before commenting. The play did not cost the Braves the game either.
Was it "ordinary" that an infielder was playing that deep into the outfield? Sounds like you're a Cardinals fan, my dude. That doesn't seem "ordinary" to me.
One final thought, the ball takes the catcher into the pathway of the runner, what is he supposed to do? Not move, not catch the ball, and let 2 runs score? In addition, the runner was out by a mile, it wasn't even close.
Bear Udyr He is allowed to catch it in the line if he has too BUT if he could have caught it out of the way then he is at fault. This is an instance where it looks like he should be able to step up and field the ball without blocking the plate. That is what the ump saw. Right call.
But then you wouldn't get to hear the announcers make idiots of themselves. It wasn't the wrong call. They even put the graphic up and highlighted it. The catcher was blocking the plate without the ball. Pretty clear. If he wants to rant, he should do so about the rule. Not the call. The call was made correctly by rule
I'm confused on this play, the runner never tried for home base, never touched it, the catcher tagged the runner clear as day, and finally the ump called the runner out....end of story or am I missing something....? Please help
as a non baseball player looking from the outside.... the rules say the player cant block the path to a plate if he doesnt have the ball. the catcher didnt have the ball when he stepped across and blocked the path even though the runner was miles away. i think what they are trying to say is the catcher could've stepped forward to catch the ball and not block the path. just my interpretation of it anyway
If the runner cared about the rules, he would have avoided contact by sliding. He is a hypocrite for not doing so and then complaining the catcher was blocking the plate.
I am an umpire myself and he should be out. I don't however blame the umpires on the field. In fact they called him out! It was the umpires reviewing the play in New York that called it safe. The umps of the field had to go with that decision. So to the Marlins coach, you have the right to be be pissed off, just not at those umps on the field.
I'll still say the worst call was in a 1998 game between the Yankees and Orioles at The Stadium. Yankees were up by 1 in the 9th but Orioles got first two batters on. Next batter tried to bunt them over but bunted right back to Rivera on the mound, who threw to get the lead runner at third. Brosius at 3B CLEARLY closed his glove too soon and the ball bounced OFF his glove... and the 3B ump, standing BEHIND Brosius, called the runner OUT. Then he ejected every single person on the Orioles who argued, and refused to check with the crew chief who was working 1B and had a better view. He makes the right call, Orioles have bases loaded and the tying run at third with no out. Instead it's now 1st and 2nd with one out... and the next batter grounds into a double play to end the game. Absolutely horrible.
The reason this is the right call is because he purposefully moved into the path of the baseline when he squared up. he could have caught it out of the baseline just fine. He moved into the path and didn't give Cozart any of the plate. These announcers are so biased. He had to go that way to get the ball but not into that path of the baseline. Safe! Right call whether they like it or not.
Rex Iustus but its a new rule so you're wrong. he blocked the plate before he went to get the throw. new rule states that that is not allowed. old rules you're right. new rules not so much. he couldn't slide because there was nothing to slide into cuz the catcher was blocking it. by no means it it right. but it was the correct call
***** Actually -- and factually -- you are wrong. The catcher is ALLOWED to go into the baseline to catch the ball. AKA the catcher can go into the baseline if the throw takes him into the baseline. The throw took him up the line -- AND he was still out by 10 feet -- he's out. You are factually wrong Andrew.
Ryan Keough FACTUALLY SPEAKING.....he was blocking the plate before he got the ball. the throw did not take him into the line. he was already blocking the plate before he went into the baseline even more for the throw. FACTUALLY SPEAKING he is safe. The marlins radio is basing on him not sliding and that he did should be out. that wheat everyone else is saying too. he doesnt have to slide if the plate is blocked and guess what it was. you are wrong... this call was right.
You call that padding armor? How dense are you? Those pads only reduce impact from a foul tip, they are utterly worthless when a full grown man hits you running full speed. They are not football pads. You want to see people tackling each other, stick to football.
The worst call of all time took place in Detroit in June of 2010 when Jim Joyce called the runner safe despite the ball reaching the glove of the first baseman a week and a half before the runner reached the bag.
I honestly think this whole "replay" thing shouldn't be used for everything. Cozart is out. Man I wish MLB would bring back the collision rule. So dumb how you can't knock into the catcher. I think this replay thing should just be used for calling home runs and tagging players.
The most amount if challenges there can be is 4, and I don't event think that has ever happened. Therefore, the challenges are useful and they aren't used that often.
Kim Cafran-Lilien Does it maintain the purity of the game if the Buster Posey, Mauer, or any other catcher that hits well is moved to another base because teams are afraid of them getting injured? Posey already had a broken leg from a collision before the rule came in effect. I mean, I think if we have coaches refusing to send runners because they're afraid a catcher might block the plate dangerously well and if we have teams not putting the best catchers at catcher, that's a pretty big hit to the integrity of the game. We've already diluted the regular season down quite a bit, to the point that fans of good teams pretty much figure, "Oh well, it's just April" when their team loses early on. Honestly, if I was managing a team with a superstar catcher and the collision rules were eliminated right now, I'd tell him not to block the plate off. It's April. Why lose him for the rest of the year just to get an extra out at the plate here and there?
+juan quiroz Learn the rules. Pause it at 1:25. The catcher's left leg is in the basepath and the ball is nowhere near him. That's interference. The catcher cannot move into the basepath until he has the ball. Not 1 second before. Not 1/10th of a second before.
I don't like either team, but that's an awful call. Blocking the plate or not, with the ball beating cozart to the plate by that much, it shouldn't even be a discussion to whether he's out or not. He could be out by 80 feet, but if you think the catcher was in front of the plate and blocking it, what are you gonna do, call him safe? This game has been around for 150 years. Stop changing it.
That has to be one of the best analogies I've read, hands down. Call on the diamond should not have been reversed for the simple fact that the runner would have been out no matter what, and it looks like (in my opinion) that the runner had a lane to the plate anyways. Bad call. Coming from a Jays fan
Jett Lennox Like i said in a post above, i don't like this rule either but it was the right call by the rule. The moment he stepped over the 3rd base line without the ball he was in violation of that rule. And saying he would be out no matter what is stupid because if it was still legal to run over the catcher, i'm sure he would have and possibly knocked the ball loose.
Okay yeah I see what you're saying. All I'm saying that if the catcher gave him the lane to the plate according to the rule, he would've had plenty of time to tag him, I just don't agree with the call. It's kind of like that interference call against the cardinals in the World Series two years ago. The ump projected that he would've been safe...here he could've projected him out. But I see what you're saying. Dumb rule no matter what haha
Horrible call. The catcher was in no way blocking the runner before possession. How can you block a runner who is 5 steps away? He did not change his pace or stride until well after the catcher had the ball, and he whined his way past the plate. The runners path was not obstructed until the catcher had the ball. Given the way this was called, now if a runner is still on third and a catcher crosses the baseline to catch a throw from the outfielder, he should get a free run because his "pathway was blocked". It was a ridiculous call, and that doesn't even take the fact he was moving to catch the ball.
You can block a runner 5 steps away the same way if he is 1 step away, by standing in his pathway. It's a poorly written rule. It should say that the catcher can't impede the runner.
Smash Er - Dead on. The catcher HAD TO MOVE into the path of the runner to catch the thrown ball. Then, once he caught the ball, the runner was dead, not even close to home plate, so how in the hell was he ever "obstructed"? Answer: He wasn't. He was out and he knew it, just like everybody else in the ball park knew it. Those guys in New York making these judgments are so clueless, they've made a farce of replay review in MLB. They're fucking up the game.
Oh, what a sucker I am for headlines! 1) Not the worst call by far, in baseball. 2) The announcer is a loud mouth. Calm down and watch the replay. 3) Runner was SAFE in my opinion. And I agree with New York. Catcher set up across the base path blocking it, independent of the throw. The runner was two strides away, a nanosecond from home plate, and the catcher still did not have possession of the ball. The catcher did not have to move into the base path to catch it. In the old days, the runner would have simply knocked the catcher over resulting in possible serious injury. The new rule was brought in to stop that. Parents who coach Little League are quite familiar with the rule. The announcer seems to display ignorance of the new rule.
Mulchinock: "Catcher set up across the base path blocking it, independent of the throw." - WRONG on count #1 "The runner was two strides away, a nanosecond from home plate, and the catcher still did not have possession of the ball." - WRONG on count #2 "The catcher did not have to move into the base path to catch it". - And WRONG on count #3 Try again idiot.
Yes, I agree on the Jim Joyce blown call being the worst in history. I also believe Joyce owning up to it, and Gallaraga bringing out the line up card to Joyce the very next day, who was the home plate umpire that game, were the greatest examples of sportsmanship in history.
+Jeff Brown I'm not saying this is the way it is, but it seems to me the final responsibility for the call should be with the head ump on the field, not some committee back in NYC. So a team can ask for a call to be reviewed, and NYC can give their opinion to the ump on the field, but the ultimate decision should belong to the ump. If committees of umps in NYC are making calls on the field, then there is way more effed up with MLB than just this call.
dLimboStick I agree but there is no way he's not going with what the replay officials in New York say. It would probably be his last game to ever umpire in the majors if he did that.
dLimboStick Lol. So true! I honestly believe this, "bad call," is more of a bad rule of baseball, that stems from the Buster Posey injury and subsequent overreaction. Just like awful NFL rules that define whether certain plays are actual catches or not (think of the Megatron and Dez Bryant nullifications, etc.). Certain bad rules need to be changed and the refs and umps might not look so incompetent.
"It'll be like Tee-ball pretty soon" ... haha, silly tv man! What do you think will happen, like they'll make an intentional walk automatic? That's crazy talk!
+Max Tovella If the catcher is illegally (that is, without having the ball in his possession) blocking the plate then the runner is called safe automatically.
+counterstriving You are not "blocking" the plate until the runner is in the immediate area. By the time the runner got to the immediate area the catcher had already received the ball in plenty of time. What the hell was the catcher supposed to do? If this is the way baseball is going to be ruled then the catcher would have no choice but to just get out of the way and let the runner score. This was in 2014..... has there been clarification since then?
+Max Tovella >>>>> He didn't even touch home............... True, but once he gives up on the play and goes to the dugout he is out. I'm not even sure the tag was ever made for that matter. Totally horrible call.
Nonsense. The rule states, “ *Unless the catcher is in possession of the ball* the catcher cannot block the pathway...”. And, “If, in the judgment of the umpire, the catcher *without possession of the ball* blocked the pathway of the runner...” If the catcher didn’t have possession of the ball then the umpires can apply this rule and you are right. Did the catcher have possession of the ball in this play?
what do you mean? if the catcher wasn't blockingz then he's out. if he wasz which is what the umpires decided, then it's illegal and the runner is safe
+SecondKyle i was thinking the same thing but the rule says that if the catcher is blocking the path the runner automatically gets the base, the dispute is not weather its safe or out its about the carcher blocking home plate which leads to if the rule applyes or not
Rindge Leaphart No, he wasn't blocking the plate though, they explained that in the video. It was a clean call and Cozart never touched home plate anyway so he was out anyway.
+SecondKyle of course, i agree he was not blocking home plate it shoud have been an out, but what happened is that becuase the humpires decided that he was blocking home plate the runner doesnt need to touch the base he just gets it thats why he scored wihout touching the base, its really simple to understand really
This is amusing hearing the view from the Cincinnati announcers. It would be interesting to hear what Miami's announcer is saying about this at the same time.
How’s he gonna slide with the catcher there lol? That’s feet first into the mans chest there. Catcher was in the way. Sorry about it but there’s many ways to make that play differently
