800 LB Gorilla in the Room - Bad or Good Call on the Utley "Slide" in NLDS

I think the only question at this point is ribs or ear hole.

Fenway - the picture that you're using is deceptive. It's not from last night game / play - although it does show that Utley comes in hot to break up DP's.   Here's a link to video - http://es.pn/1R5EZg4 .  

 

From this video it sure looks to me like Tejada tagged the bag. Not sure about being out for interference though. Utley slid (tackled) late to break it up. He was not out of base path though.

I don't have skin in the game with these two teams but this type of slide came up in a thread a month or so ago.  Yeah, he was sort of in the base path but didn't start sliding until WELL past the bag.  It seems to be within the MLB rules but they keep letting it get further and further out of control.  I've seen so many of these types of slides where there is clearly no intent to catch the bag and the slide starts or goes well beyond.  This needs to change.  Sliding hard INTO the bag is fine - part of the game.  Taking out the MIF that wants to occupy the space between runner and bag is fine - part of the game.  Going three feet PAST the bag or more should not be fine.  It's fairly easy to see.  I just don't get it.  The pic above is actually a perfect example.  He is well past the bag and just STARTING his slide.  No chance or intention of reaching the bag safely.  I guess it's going to take a flurry of torn up knees and broken legs to bring about obviously needed change, which is unfortunate.

My take is bad, bad, & bad. Utley doesn't hit the ground until after hitting Tejada. Tejada does touch the bag and Utley never tags second. Can't figure that one out there.  Didn't put the neighborhood play in for just that reason?

Can't wait to see who gets beaned on Monday. 

Phanatic,

 

My cut and paste skills aren't what they used to be without my reading glasses.  I've updated my picture.  You are right he is not out of the base path, however he did not slide until he was past the bag thereby initiating contact and not touching the bag on the slide.  

 

The talking heads keep talking about Utley's intent..."nobody knows Utley's intent".  That is absolute horsesh*t.  Utley's intent was to break up the play (score a run) any way possible and put the burden of the post season call on the Umpires  It worked. 

 

 

Made no attempt at bag, should have been ruled out, injury or no injury. IMO went beyond hard nosed and was dirty.

 .

Fenway - that is still the wrong picture. Here is the right one - :*)

 

 

+1 to ribs or ear hole

It's legal in pro ball...I don't agree with it, but it's legal.

Because of replay, the neighborhood play is no more.

I think it's time for Utley to go.  He was a great player but has reduced himself to a thug.

Bad.  If legal (and that is debatable), the rules need to be changed to where there is no debate.

 

Rule change will be called the "Utley" rule.

 

 

Really? Utley a thug? Give me a break.

 

Legal within the current rules, if they want to change it then change it, good hard nosed play. Stop the whining particularly, Pedro, wa wa wa. He can pick on 70 YO coach, but wants to whine about this? 

 

Sorry, move on, next game. 

 

I am a Dodger fan but LOVE those two flame throwers from the Mets! 

I think the Mets will win it also, Dodgers don't have the offense to handle really good pitching. 

I thought that the neighborhood play was non-reviewable?  Has this changed since they first came out with IR?  Thought i remembered them saying they were going to allow the neighborhood play stay and be a non-reviewable play in order to maintain the safety of the MIs?

Good intention to break up double play, bad execution. My two cents

If they make a rule to protect the catcher from getting drilled why wouldn't they protect the MIF from getting slaughtered? The SS was hit behind the bag, he wasn't gaining ground to 1B.

 

I thought the (slide?) was late. I understand these guys play for keeps and this was a must game.  I can even appreciate what Utley did, that type of slide is also dangerous to the slider. At the same time, it sure could be called dirty, but more importantly I thought it was kind of a dumb play by Utley.  That said, it is hard to believe how everything turned out.

 

First of all, Utley should have known this wasn't going to be a double play As soon as he saw the soft toss from the 2b.  Why would he take a chance on what the umpire might call?  If they did call interference, it actually would have been a double play and the Mets would have been out of the inning without scoring.

 

Then after the collision he never went back to touch the bag. A play that should never have happened changed the game completely.  And with the broken leg it could even change the series.

 

I would have called it a double play because it seemed Utley never went for the bag (not even with his hand) And it was late.  Furthermore, I think it was a very high risk play by Utley.  Had he been called out and it was called a double play, today everyone would be talking about how stupid that (slide?) was.

 

I don't favor either team, you can appreciate the effort, but to me this play was unnecessary and border line stupid, even though it worked out perfectly for the Dodgers.  If MLB calls this a legal slide, it is time to make a rule change to protect those MIF's without any protective equipment, just like they changed the rule to protect the catcher.

I'll be at the game Monday and Tuesday nights (lifelong Mets fan)...the retribution won't come until the game is out of hand or locked up...and don't assume it will come from a pitcher. Somebody may get run over very hard on the basepaths in this one. 

 

Either way the benches will clear on Monday or Tuesday in NYC. 

Unlike a pitcher purposely throwing at a hitter, I don't think Utley's intent was to injure anyone.  His intent was to break up a double play and do what is necessary to win a game the Dodgers desperately needed.

 

As mentioned before, I thought it wasn't a great decision on his part the way he did it and it wasn't necessary, but as sometimes happens, even the wrong play can turn into a winning play.

 

Bottom line, in my opinion, it was unnecessary.  If that is called legal, the rule needs to change.

 

I don't think there will be any retaliation by the Mets, unless it would be something they think will help them win a game.  Then again, it might be interesting if Utley had to turn a double play.

For the win!

Completely agree. I don't think Utley is a dirty player but this was a bad move on his part.  Though it may not technically be illegal it was totally unnecessary and likely to cause injury. 

Pretty sure he will Mets pitchers will not be quite as diplomatic as Collins.  

Here is how one ended up over 40 years ago in the playoffs.

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/6...uffle-at-second-base

 

 

1st and 10!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIiYw53nGd0

This is one of my favorites.

       
       


Not much has changed over the years, has it?  Other than maybe our collective attitude towards it...

Wow, that McRae slide was unbelievable, Way worse than the Rose and Utley slides. I'm a big Utley fan but I thought the slide was late. Not egregiously offline, but definitely late.

Although I am a Chase Utley fan he should have used more finesse.   Slide into the short stops lower part of his cleats. This way you take him out without breaking anything. And he would have looked good taking 'em out,  

So Chase Utley is suspended for two games for a slide that was deemed legal, for which he was ruled safe by the league office, and which resulted in the tying run being scored?  WTH?  Small consolation to the Mets and Tejada.  What a mess MLB is making of this.

       
       

I agree. What in the rules made the slide illegal?  I know it is unpopular, but illegal??

It's illegal to target the fielder -- which is what he did.  Should have been ruled illegal at the time

Nope. Torre is changing the definition of interference under this rule. Until today, this was a legal play.

       
       


Here is a relevant rule

It is interference by a batter or a runner when --

(e) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate. In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner.

No, that's not relevant. That applies only to a batted ball.

I asked my son his perspective, he had his leg broken going into his senior HS year on a play just like that while playing in Australia, missed his senior season.

 

His take was it was a bad slide (interference) but disagreed with the suspension.

 

Funny, he is down under playing baseball there now and ran into one of his host families kids from back in 2008.

 

The first game he played there last week was at the same field where he was injured way back then.

 

Baseball is a small world!

 

Pretty sure the only way this would be interference is if the runner went out of the baseline to take out the MI. Utley was well within touching distance of the base. It really was a legal slide.

Heard Harold Reynolds say that, as a SS, he thought it was partially Tejada's fault for staying behind the bag. Reynolds thought he should have gotten out of the way because the ball wasn't hit hard enough to get a DP and Tejada should have known that. Makes sense in a way.

And BTW, I think if Tejada didn't break his leg, no one would even be talking about this. Just another play. It's unfortunate his leg got broken, but I think it was kind of a freak thing. Same play could happen 100 more times with no injury.  Sometimes things just happen...

Utley suspended for games 3 and 4 by MLB. Has filed an appeal.

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/playoff...oke-ruben-tejada-leg

 

IMO: That wasn't a slide.  Utley threw himself at Tejada's legs. Heat of the moment - playoffs, looking to tie the score, etc. - it's a play every player is taught to make, go in hard, take out the turn, break up the double play. The only place where "a slide shall be deemed appropriate" is in rule 7.13(1)c comment about the play at the plate. Otherwise, you won't find the definition of a "slide" in the MLB rule book, although the FED (high school) rule book has it.

 

Regardless of how we feel about the result/aftermath, it's an "accepted" baseball play in MLB even though through HS and College it's not. I guess it's felt a grown man making a living off the sport should be "OK" with the play. The fact that the out at 2B got overturned is odd since if Tejada didn't touch the bag and Utley didn't touch the bag before running off the field, then how do you award him 2B when he abandoned his effort to touch the base before running off the field?

 

As for retaliation - you don't think MLB hasn't said something to the Mets? I don't see retaliation this year, because whomever retaliates is going to be suspended and then where does it end?  I would also not be surprised to see an umpire call an out on a similar play from here on in.

Well, there is also rule 6.05 part m

Rule 6.05 reads:

A batter is out when --

(m) A preceding runner shall, in the umpire's judgment, intentionally interfere with a fielder who is attempting to catch a thrown ball or to throw a ball in an attempt to complete any play:

Rule 6.05(m) Comment: The objective of this rule is to penalize the offensive team for deliberate, unwarranted, unsportsmanlike action by the runner in leaving the baseline for the obvious purpose of crashing the pivot man on a double play, rather than trying to reach the base. Obviously this is an umpire's judgment play.

My $5 worth is they don't need a new rule to handle this situation.  They just need to tweek the existing rule.  First if a fielder is behind the bag that should allow his protection because that means the double play was so quick the relay is being thrown before the runner can get there OR it's act like a first baseman and stretch while touching the bag.  In that case there's no chance at turning the double play but you shouldn't be able to slide over the bag and take out a fielder.

 

Change the "has to be able to touch the bag" aspect.  How many times do we see a runner slide at a MIF who is facing the OF instead of actually trying to reach the bag?  This needs to be the runner actually has to touch the bag.  This should pull the runner back into the basepath a little bit more.

 

Last - common sense needs to allowed to make judgements.  In this case common sense tells you that Utley went out of his way to take out Tejada.  Doesn't matter what intent is because that's so hard to figure out.  The intent was to break up a double play although as PG said Utley should have realized there was no need to break it up.  

 

I don't want to see the high school rule of only going into the bag.  The existing rule is fine with small tweeks.

 

Also, I don't care how "legal" this slide was - I think any umpire in MLB would have been fine if they called interference because that's what it was - interference.

You mean players and fans in NYC might become violent...but they are known for being such calm peace loving people.

I'm no expert on the rules and their traditional interpretation.

 

Utley clearly, recklessly, and needlessly took out Tejada's legs. In doing that, he "took Tejada out" of the playoffs. If there was no injury, there would have a been a ton of drama over this but nothing done; however, injuring a player doing it "ups the ante" and I agree with the suspension and hope it is upheld. And, hypocritically, I hope Utley gets NAILED when he steps into the batter's box.