[doug from upland]

Before the rule change it would have been a great play by the catcher. But he knew the rule.

[OrangeHoof]

I thought the blocking rule was supposed to be an umpire’s judgement, like whether the third base umpire thinks the batter swung at the pitch. If, in the umpire’s judgement, the catcher blocked the plate, then he blocked the plate. Maddon would have a point if this is true because the replay official is not the umpire and the umpire cannot change a non-call after the fact.

[Getready]

In the old days the runner would flatten the catcher.It could be the end of either or both players careers. I dont think one can impede a runners.proogress in any way.

P.s....not a dodger fan.

[ifinnegan]

It goes both ways.

Without the rule Culberson would have plowed him over and broke his leg and been safe.

[Deplorable American1776]

That's why he doesn't live in Chicago. His restaurant is in Tampa's Hyde Park, not in Chicago's Hyde Park...😀. He loves the Cubs, but he loves the Tampa Bay area...

[fungoking]

I'm a Cardinal fan, that alone tells you what I think if the Cubs, but...
I caught in hs and college and coached catchers in high school for 25 years. For all of my coaching career high school had the block/slide rule.
I support the rule but there are a couple of flaws, one highlighted on thus play. I've seen the throw take the catcher up the line toward 3rd and the catcher get run over and the base runner penalized even though it was the catcher pursuing the ball that caused the contact.
And what happened on this play. The throw is pulling the catcher back side of the plate. The step he takes to get in front of the throw is the same step he would take to block the plate. That's why it had to go to replay. The difference between having the ball and legally blocking is tenths of seconds.