It would seem many Giants fans would advocate for home plate collisions to be abolished for the reason that it's Buster Posey that suffered a devastating injury. Any big name catcher, i.e. Joe Mauer or Brian McCann, would have their fans yelling outrage because their franchise catcher is injured in such a way. Had it been Eli Whiteside or another backup been injured in a collision, how much debate and outcry would swirl around? My guess is, no where near as much. Because it's Buster Posey, the Giants' stud of a player and cornerstone for many years, the outcry is strong.
As a die hard Giants fan, I understand the demand for a rule change. For safety and health, I definitely advocate for positive player health, whether on the Giants or another team. However, changing the collision rule as a reactionary measure just because the victim happens to be an up-and-coming catcher does NOT seem to be a good enough reason to change the rule in the first place. Honestly though, I'm somewhat on the fence in terms of rule change for different reasons. Posey, and other catchers, understand the potential dangers to being a catcher, as we've seen Ray Fosse's famous home plate collision from Pete Rose, Mike Piazza being bloodied on the head by a swinging back, and Ivan Rodriguez accidentally breaking his hand on a player's bat when attempting to throw a base stealer out at second. They are risky injuries that are not natural to the game, but unfortunately, they can happen.
Anyone who follows the NFL would know about defensive rule changes that have been implemented over the years, that has made it more difficult for D-linemen or D-backs to do their job effectively; namely no more helmet-to-helmet hits, no horse-collar tackling, the implementation of the "Tom Brady" rule, etc. Once again, I'm very much in favor of player safety, but to the point where it takes away so much from the game becomes a stretch. Albeit homeplate collisions are rare, and even rarer are its injuries, I don't see a need to change the rule. I don't know what a good middle ground would be in terms of protecting player health while keeping the game the way it is.
In terms of advocating for a rule change, this would be my reasoning... Within the baseball diamond, home plate is only portion where anyone would witness a base runner-to-fielder collision. Correct me if i'm wrong, collisions at first, second, or third base aren't exactly legal, are they? For example, if a base runner is stealing second base, they can't collide with the 2nd baseman in order to knock the ball out in efforts to be called safe. For as long as I've followed baseball, I thought it was unusual to have such an inconsistency in terms of where collisions can and can not occur. Baseball is not exactly a contact sport, so I advocate for consistency all around the diamond, hence no more home plate collisions.
By the end of all these thoughts, I'm still on the fence in regards to a "NO home plate collision" rule. And if a rule change were to take place, it's not so much about keeping Buster Posey safe as a catcher, but to create consistency - which is not the same reason why most people would advocate for a rule change in the first place. I know I contradicted myself to death by writing all this... Thanks for reading