Jackie Robinson's steal of home

[greymule]

I suspect that everyone who frequents this forum has seen films of Jackie Robinson's famous outright steal of home (off Whitey Ford) in the 1955 World Series. The argument Yogi Berra put up was quite vehement, and the play was certainly close.

But when watching the series highlight film recently, I noticed that Yogi Berra clearly stepped well out onto the plate to catch the pitch, denying the batter any chance to contact it, whether by bunt or swing.

So my question is, Should the PU have called INT on Berra (or a balk on Ford)?

(I'd post a video capture, but the DVD is packed up for my move to Alabama.)

[SanDiegoSteve]

Not unless the batter was trying to swing or bunt at the pitch. If it was a straight steal, then the batter wasn't going to swing or bunt anyway. If the batter wanted an INT call, he should have tried to swing the bat and demonstrated that he was interfered with.

[RPatrino]

I would never call that on Yogi, he's a legend.

[umpjim]

What aboutthis rule from MLB.com?
"7.07 If, with a runner on third base and trying to score by means of a squeeze play or a steal, the catcher or any other fielder steps on, or in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the batter or his bat, the pitcher shall be charged with a balk, the batter shall be awarded first base on the interference and the ball is dead."

I've called this at lower levels and if the batter had swung the catcher would have had a headache, ribache or broken arm.

[Welpe]

Did the rule exist at that time?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by umpjim

What aboutthis rule from MLB.com?
"7.07 If, with a runner on third base and trying to score by means of a squeeze play or a steal, the catcher or any other fielder steps on, or in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the batter or his bat, the pitcher shall be charged with a balk, the batter shall be awarded first base on the interference and the ball is dead."

I've called this at lower levels and if the batter had swung the catcher would have had a headache, ribache or broken arm.

Okay, I just watched and rewatched, backwards and forwards, stopping frame by frame, the video of Jackie Robinson's steal of home. Yogi did not step on home plate until he caught the ball. Before catching the ball, he had both feet behind the plate, not touching it. So, I don't think he violated 7.07 at all. The play happened so fast, that I doubt that the umpire could distinguish where Yogi's feet were at the time he caught the pitch.