A different take

[umpjim]

"7.09(e) covers it nicely, IMO.

They added "runner who has scored" to this rule in the past few years. Did the scoring runner impede the defense? Well, I would say so, yes. Without Rodriguez grabbing Morgan and shoving him back towards the plate, Morgan doesn't retouch and there's a possibility of an appeal.

As far as the collision goes, that's a big fat nothing"



That's a stretch. I could buy it but I don't. I am surprised that Angel Hernandez picked up on that change since his last rules mishap. I guess they told Angel he better be reading the rule book and he did. Let's go parsing "impede". BTW, did he place the remaining runner as required under the INT rule?

As far as the collision, it won't be a big fat nothing next time. The big boys can police themselves but this one should have been called as USC.