Baseball Is Not a Contact Sport
That’s it. That’s the whole thing. There are contact sports out there. A whole lot of contact sports. Baseball is not and never has been among them.
Sometimes, players do come into contact with one another. Sometimes, they do so violently, and sometimes, when they do so violently, they’re even on opposing teams. It’s not that the players are forbidden to touch, and it’s not like there’s anything you can do to totally eliminate all collisions. But baseball, at its core, isn’t a contact sport. It’s a bat-and-ball sport, part catch and part golf. Baseball should be played in the spirit in which it was intended.
You ever wonder why players don’t wear pads? I mean, catchers wear pads, almost from head to toe, but that’s because they’re getting shot at by a cannon 130 times a game. Batters wear helmets because sometimes the cannon has a calibration error or an attitude. Defenders wear gloves because sometimes the cannonballs come in hot. Defenders wear cups for basically the same reason. But there isn’t anything else. No other helmets, no other chest protectors, no other shin guards. It’s not because ballplayers are tough guys, impervious to pain. It’s because ballplayers aren’t supposed to run into one another, and when they do, it’s either a freak accident, or something that hasn’t yet been sufficiently codified.
The Chase Utley play — or the Ruben Tejada play, depending — might not be a matter of rules. It might just be a matter of rule enforcement, although it’s probably at least as much rule ambiguity. By now we all know what the rules say. We also know that, according to baseball precedent, Utley didn’t do much of anything wrong. As nearly everyone has come out to say, Utley more or less did as he’d been instructed to do all his life. He’d been instructed to do that because baseball allowed those things to happen. In a playoff situation, things were only more intense, Utley under only more pressure to break up any potential play. Utley probably went further than most other players would’ve, but we’re talking percentages. Utley isn’t the real villain. Utley’s the latest symptom.
In a way — in a big-picture way — baseball should emerge better for this. Not that the Utley play was necessary, but baseball is in the process of changing, and the process has been accelerated. Obviously, only weeks ago, there was the Chris Coghlan incident. Earlier last week, there was nearly a Didi Gregorius / Jose Altuve incident. Now we have this incident, and people are talking about this incident instead of talking about, say, Jacob deGrom and Noah Syndergaard. They’re talking about this incident instead of the rest of the playoffs. This has long been a weird sort of loophole, an only occasionally conspicuous exception, but the ultra-aggressive takeout slide hasn’t fit with the rest of baseball, and once they moved to protect catchers, infielders were going to be next. Infielders will be next. They’re about to try something in the Arizona Fall League. It’s going to go well, after a brief adjustment period, like all changes for the better.
It doesn’t matter if former players don’t like it. People always prefer the circumstances they themselves experienced, and former players don’t have to worry about any consequences these days. They’re not the ones in danger of getting blown up. The further back you go for opinions, the more progress you effectively undo.
It doesn’t matter if certain current players don’t like it. It matters more than former players, of course, but people are always resistant to change, even good change, and there’s always a reluctance to have to try to learn something new. As an argument, “that’s how it’s always been” is a bad one. It’s powerful, but it stands in the way of improvement.
It doesn’t matter if there are fans who don’t like it. There are fans who didn’t like the moves to better protect catchers. There are fans who loved those collisions. But no one is a baseball fan because of the moments of contact, and the people who like those moments the most aren’t primarily baseball fans, because baseball doesn’t deliver those moments as often as other sports, and those fans will gravitate to those. You don’t have to worry about the opinion of a football fan who watches baseball when there’s nothing else on.
What matters is that players get hurt, and while you can’t make rules to eliminate all injuries, you can certainly work to eliminate injuries caused by other players when they deliberately behave in certain ways. It doesn’t really make sense that baseball, as a sport, would leave the door open to vicious takeout slides at second base. It doesn’t go with everything else, especially now that we’ve mostly gotten rid of collisions at home, and the reality is that baseball has enough of an injury problem already. Every year, we lose some of the most talented pitchers in the world, simply because they tried to pitch. That problem isn’t going away in the foreseeable future, and it’s bad for the sport, especially if injury frequencies are increasing. Players should be protected as best they can. Baseball should keep safe as many as it can. It already knows it’s going to lose a few. It should try to keep that number as low as possible.
Torn ligaments are going to happen. Godawful comebackers to the mound are going to happen. Fingers will break during lousy bunt attempts; hamates will break for apparently no reason at all. Baseball can be a destructive game, and there’s always going to be pain and consequence, but there are unavoidable injuries and there are avoidable injuries. There’s an argument for why baseball would be worse if pitchers weren’t allowed to throw 95 miles per hour anymore. There’s no argument for why baseball would be worse if baserunners were no longer allowed to try to mess up double plays when they’ve already been called out. It might disappoint the bloodthirsty among us, but baseball isn’t selective for many of that kind of fan.
When this play goes away, everyone will get used to it. Nothing meaningful will be lost, and something will be gained — days not lost to the disabled list. Every so often, there’ll still be a collision at second, kind of just by accident, but we can accept the accidents. We’ll get used to the elimination of the takeout slide. We got used to the elimination of the home-plate collision. Hell, we got used to the 15-team leagues and to inter-league play. We come back because the essence of baseball doesn’t change. The vicious takeout slide isn’t part of the essence of baseball. The players will adapt and be fine with it. They’ll find new ways to be aggressive within the rules — they will always always always test the limits of the rules — but if the rules are written and enforced well enough, that’s okay. If something still seems wrong, it can be tweaked again. The game is always growing.
Former players will say the game is getting softer. That’s fine. Older generations think every younger generation is soft. There’ll be fewer future ex-players with surgical scars, or walking with limps. The goal isn’t primarily to maximize player health, but to find the optimal balance of health and quality of gameplay. The game keeps getting closer.
We’re in a period of transition. The game is already changing, and right now people are most furious because they can’t believe the change isn’t yet complete. But it’s happening, and relative to the speed with which other things have happened in baseball before, it’s happening fast. C.J. Nitkowski asked a bunch of players about the Utley incident, and a few of them responded that Tejada should’ve known that it was Utley coming his way. So, he should’ve known to get out of the way as quickly as possible. Before long, the runner won’t matter. Not to the extent it does today. Infielders won’t have to consider that the guy on first base is particularly likely to try to take out their legs. Not that injury is ever the intent; it’s just that injuries happen more often when a guy runs into another guy on purpose, when he’s already out.
The only argument in favor of the takeout slide is that baseball has an established history of allowing the takeout slide. That much is true, but given that baseball isn’t and never has been a real contact sport, it’s a little odd that we got here in the first place. But it can be fixed. And it will be fixed. And baseball will still be baseball, and baseball will still be every bit as terrific. Probably, actually, a little bit more.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.
I already tried the no contact approach.
underrated post
agreed
Contact is for suckers.
Joey Gallo attempting a takeout slide on someone like Dee Gordon might knock him into the outfield.
Please tell me you mean Dee F. Gordon!!
Dee Z. Nuts
No matter if you term it a “takeout slide”, or a break up the double play slide, they describe perfectly what the intent is, and that is to interfere with the fielders ability to make a play and that is against the rules (5.09 a 13) everything else is nonsensical blather. Utley and the batter runner should have been called out on the interference, case closed, MLB and the ump blew the call big-time. Can people stop spouting nonsense and go read the damn rules that are already in the book.
I thought for sure this was going to be an article about the Astros and/or the Cubs.
Amen. Macho bullshit stinks in all its various forms.
Honk! Honk! Honk!
True. This is the one that stood out to me from the Nitkowski article: “Let baseball players handle this on the field, Utley needs to go down, that’s not being a gamer in the playoffs. I played with Utley he’s a great guy he only wanted to stop the double play but now that the shortstop is out he must pay. Utley knows this, when he gets drilled he’ll walk to first.”
Preach it, brother!
Don’t suspend Utley 2 games, suspend the 2nd base umpire who should have called the slide for what it was at the time. If there hadn’t been an injury, there wouldn’t have been a suspension at all for the exact same slide; this suspension is about P.R. and not about getting the rule right.
I think Utley definitely deserves a suspension. I don’t think Utley is a bad guy. He just got a little excited trying to make a play, pushed the limit, and went a bit too far. It happens, and that’s a shame.
But we do need to call more attention to the poor officiating that game. It would have been completely within the rulebook to end the inning right there, and instead it’s 5-2 Dodgers. That shouldn’t happen, and the ump at the very least should call out Utley.
the problem is the play is not reviewable. take out slides need deliberation and evidence to support the calling of intent.
Unless its a Hal McRae slide, its tough to see in real time
He didn’t go too far though. This isn’t even the most egregious slide we’ve seen really, it just had the worst result. His suspension was pure reaction to the stage it happened on.
Suspending Utley is silly, and you could hear it when Torre tried to explain the reasoning, horribly I might add. “Well, you know, it was just kinda a bit much, you know?”. Yeah, great content there Joe.
He went on to cite that he went after Tejada rather than the bag, slid late, and hit the ground around the same time he hit Tejada. All of these traits have been present in a lot of slides this year, it’s not like Utley did something new. Perhaps Torre needs to spend more time following the sport that he presides over.
I really hope this causes them to change the way they handle double play take out slides. And I have no rooting interest for the Mets or the Dodgers. But it is simply unfair to suspend Utley for something that the umpires have allowed to become acceptable.
I don’t disagree with anything here. Egregious or not I just think we have rules that defines a base line and is relatively easy to see whether the slider went out of it and it ends at the base, so it has a defined distance beyond the base allowed which is more important when dealing with nonlaterality issues. It is relatively easy to see whether a slider started his slide before or after the base, one being legal and the other not. The start of this piece mentions lack of enforcement of rules. I personally think that is correct, it wasn’t enforced a few days ago or when Holliday took out Scutaro a few years ago, it wasn’t thirty years ago when I played and hopefully now something changes. It is unfair seems to me that NYM lost their SS, as well. Oh, Mariners fan here, which may undercut any point I was trying to make.
Utley doesn’t deserve a suspension because MLB practically sanctions the takeout slide. If Holliday didn’t get a fine or suspension for his 2012 slide (which was WORSE) then how does Utley get suspended? You can’t change how rules are enforced out of the blue. MLB allows the neighborhood play to exist (you can’t even challenge it!!) because they know and ALLOW this to go on. Vicious slide? yep. Dirty? Yep. Allowed by MLB??? ABSOLUTELY!!! The MLBPA isn’t going to allow the league office to willy-nilly make rulings like this when there is zero precedence. They wanna change the rule and start enforcing it next year? Go for it. But suspending Utley makes no sense at all.
Utley slide toward cf and 1/2 his legs end up in tejeda. How much evidence do blind men need
The Utley hate is way overblown here, and the focus really ought to be the umpiring as you say.
To me it’s okay to blame both of them. No matter what the umpire said, what Utley did should be completely unacceptable and while the umpire should have recognized that, mistakes happen. The difference is that the umpires mistake gave the dodgers a run and extended the inning, whereas Utleys mistake gave Tejada a broken leg. Both were wrong but Utley was more wrong.
“should be unacceptable” is a normative statement. What’s more important is that it wasn’t unacceptable at the time of the slide. In fact, for most, the only reason “unacceptable” is in play is because of the terrible outcome. If Tejada gets back up, Utley would have been congratulated by most.
I don’t think it is ok to vilanize Utley or any other player…it is how everyone is taught and it needs changing, which won’t happen unless it is called differently and that comes from the top. Players and umpires aren’t the top, I don’t believe. There is an argument on how to implement and when but Utley wasn’t evil and guys won’t change their approach on sliding unless there is a penalty that causes them to change their sliding. Umpires haven’t called that play since I was a kid and they will continue to not call it unless they are instructed to pay attention to that rule and enforce it. So, I think it is on MLB to make a stand and I suppose that is why we have the situation we have today. Catching balls in front of a window didn’t mean I was a bad kid, it just meant that on paper route money I had to start changing the way I did things is all.
I 100% agree that we should be trying to remove the risk of injury from baseball and that it is a non contact sport. But, I don’t think the rules should be changed. If Tejada had taken the out at second and not tried to turn the double play he would have been fine. If Posey had not blocked the plate he would have been fine. Defensive players have a choice in the play as well. If there’s a chance for contact and you could be hurt then choose not to put yourself in that position. If the rules are changed then double plays become automatic. I do not like the way that catchers are freely allowed to block home plate now and runners must slide around them. All catchers still put their leg on the baseline to cut off the plate. And why wouldn’t you if you were not afraid of being hit. The defensive player assumes the risk of being injured by trying to complete the play.
If you’re required to slide into the bag, DPs are far from automatic. The reason Tejada was out to left field and spun backwards was to dodge an incoming takeout slide. Middle infielders will still have to avoid guys who overslide, and that’s fine. But this idea that the baserunner can target a guy who’s already trying to protect himself from exactly what happened on Sunday is appalling.
This is completely false. There are a number of examples in which the baserunner went out of their way to make contact with the defender (either the catcher or middle infielder). One that comes to mind was Torii Hunter’s collision with a White Sox catcher a few years back in which he went up the baseline to lower his shoulder into him just as the ball was getting there. MIs often do try to avoid contact by swiping the base with their foot and making throw off to the side, only to be barreled over by an incoming runner. Some of these recent collisions could have been avoided had the defender done a better job of getting out of the way, but without a rule change, these players will continue to be unnecessarily in the path of danger, all the while not adding anything to the game itself.
I think this is what makes the Utley slide so bad. No only did Tejada try and get out of the way, he did get out of the way. Utley went way three feet of the base to get him. I’m ok with contact on the baseline if a second baseman stands in the baseline in order to turn a DP – in this case contact could even be fielder interference, but to allow players to depart greatly from their path to the base simply to cause harm is ridiculous. The suspension is probably not harsh enough.
You’re making stuff up. Utley’s hand was directly over the bag so he was within reach. Tejada did a terrible job of protecting himself. He’d be the first to admit it. You just don’t plant 1 or 2 feet away from the bag assuming you’re safe. That’s idiotic.
mooondog,
The fact that a player has to protect himself at all is a problem, no? What is he protecting himself from? Oh, it’s a guy trying to take his legs out. Why are we accepting of trying to take a guys legs out? THAT, is idiotic.
The ole blame the victim, she shouldn’t hasn’t worn that outfit argument, always a winner!
This is ludicrous. Middle infielders should have every opportunity to make the plays they can without getting interfered with — and it certainly doesn’t make a double play automatic. That makes no sense.
If you slide past the bag on a force play, or miss it entirely, the back runner is out. That’s a simple rule for starters. That allows for hard slides and old-school baseball, but puts a rational limitation on it.
Posey didn’t block the plate and left a clear lane to the plate for the runner. You shouldn’t speak so assuredly of things you’re misinformed about.
http://i.imgur.com/frH0rJX.jpg
Have you played the game? You’re expected to hang in at second base and make the pivot, go for two. You were expected to block the plate…not anymore, but it was standard. And if you won’t stand in at 2b and take the hit, the manager will put someone who will. It’s really that simple.
“If Posey had not blocked the plate he would have been fine” Are you kidding? Posey was nowhere near blocking the plate. Cousins ran away from the plate right into him.
I’d love to see an article going over the history of times the neighborhood play was considered not reviewable because the play was no longer considered a double play, especially after the runner and the head of league operations both continue to call the action in question an attempt to break up a double play.
Either it was an attempted double play or not an attempt to break up a double play, but not both.
Exactly. This is the exact kind of circumstance for which the neighborhood play was made. If that doesn’t count, then we need a new definition for the neighborhood play.
Just to play devil’s advocate…
These are NOT mutually exclusive circumstances. A runner can attempt to break up a double play when in fact no double play is possible.
Brad,
You’re right about that, but for the most part the feasibility of the double play is viewed in hindsight. The blown part of this call is the part where the umps decided on the fly that this wasn’t a neighborhood play. Tejada made a pivot and attempt to throw to first that there’s no way he’s making if there are two outs, and Utley made a slide that he freely admitted was an attempt to break up a double play.
The neighborhood play is more about the fielder’s reaction to the runner’s perception of the play than the actually feasibility of the play. Tejada does his little step because he sees Utley coming in hard towards him, and Utley comes in hard because he thinks it’s a double play attempt. That’s the neighborhood play, basing it on anything other than the lead runner’s perception is ridiculous, because that’s what the fielder is reacting to.
Yeah my understanding is the neighborhood play only exists to keep the fielder safe, so that he can get clear of a slide and not necessarily be stuck to the bag when it is dangerous to be. This would apply even if the fielder has no intention to throw to first, if the runner is coming right at him.
I also think it’s pretty crazy that we are paying serious attention to hard slides to break up double plays but that pitchers can throw 95mph fastballs at other players, on purpose with little to no consequences. A hitter has no say or defense against a pitcher targeting him. But it’s a part of the game they say. Arrieta was most certainly hit on purpose in the wild card game and no one batted an eyelash. There was no suspension and no talk of rule change. A few weeks ago, Papelbon was suspended three games for throwing at Manny Machado’s head. For directly throwing a fastball at a defenseless player’s head. Three games. Utley got two for a hard slide.
The difference is Tejada got hurt. Wait for somebody’s skull to crack from a pitcher going head hunting, and THEN we’ll see a rule change.
This isn’t the 1920’s, people wear helmets now.
… and people’s skulls still get fractured – see G. Stanton.
Awhile back, hockey set a legal precedence for actually prosecuting players for assault in extreme cases. Most pitchers understand that if they actually intentionally hit a guy in the head, they could go to jail. Even the nasty guys who would like to go headhunting.
Of course, not all pitchers are smart enough to make the connection. But if Arrieta had been hit in the head and suffered a serious injury, I would expect assault charges to be filed. Thankfully, he was hit “by the book.”
There’s a big difference here. Pitchers have much less control over where their pitches land than runners have over where their feet take them. Hence, it’s more difficult to judge intent with pitchers.
There is not much more that can be done when it comes to pitchers, but dirty tackles on middle infielders should and can easily be outlawed. They just need to tweak existing rules.
It’s also notable that many players prefer not to protect themselves further. Sure, Heyward and Stanton use the mouthguard on their helmet, but no one else does. And plenty of players choose not to wear cups. Even with the pitchers getting hit with line drives, only Alex Torres wears the special hat. But I think just about every player can get behind banning tackling from the game.
Papelbon’s suspension was too mild (although, one could argue that it’s more of punishment to play for the Nationals than to be suspended, but I digress) this is no reason to make a similar mistake with Utley. If it is clear that a player is attempting to do unnecessary physical harm to another, the league has to crack down with severity.
I don’t know where you’ve been, but a lot of people complain about the retaliation culture in baseball and especially about throwing at a batter’s head. There is a lot of resistance among the players; Bryce Harper called out Papelbon and look what he got for speaking out.
And what Utley did was not a slide. It was not a hard slide. It was a body block.
Indeed. This ain’t hockey.
I would argue that MLB is exactly like hockey as they both rely on players to police players rather than have strict penalties for illegal actions. It has always been a very childish tit for tat system.
Except that hockey is totally a contact sport, and fighting is inevitable, and probably the best way to defuse tempers after a cheap shot. So there’s no way to get rid of it by rules changes, but I think it can be done for baseball.
Just neighing.
Not for nothing, but hockey fights can absolutely be eliminated. In college hockey, if you get in a fight, you’re kicked out of that game AND the next game. Hence, there aren’t a lot of fights, and when there IS a fight, you know that the guys fighting are REALLY pissed off, and that makes the fight actually entertaining, as opposed to the tired fights in the NHL. If you want fighting, sign up for that boxing of UFC pay-per-view.
Just neighing. 🙂
Fighting is definitely not “inevitable” in hockey.
Hay Paul, good point. Haven’t seen a college hockey game in a real long time, but it sounds like they’re onto something. And come to think of it, a lot of the NHL fights look like crappy UFC fights with all the clutching and hugging and falling.
For those talking about the umpire making the wrong call in the game… The umpire being wrong doesn’t make the Utley slide right.
Exactly. They can both be suspended (and I believe they should). Utley slid recklessly, that’s all that needs to be said on his behalf. Intent to injure doesn’t matter, precedent doesn’t matter. The umpires did not properly enforce the penalties (two outs and no runs) for this type of play, demonstrating that they may not properly understand the situation and thus need to improve themselves.
I believe it is as simple as this: the rulebook will never be able to fully articulate the way baseball should be played because in competitive activities, rules are always tested, bent, and broken to gain an advantage. Whether its technically legal by the letter of the rulebook, or not, the MLB needs to review player and umpire actions/decisions in irregular scenarios like these to ensure the future prevention of reckless, injurious baseball, and promote better understanding (by players and umps) of the spirit of the game.
“precedent doesn’t matter.”
That is an absolutely ludicrous statement. Precedent is pretty much the most important thing in our culture when deciding if someone did something wrong or not.
No, public opinion in the most important thing. Take for instance, the changing NFL rules on protecting receivers, or spouses, or on a wider scale USA’s changing consensus on gay marriage. Public opinion changes and then the rules or laws change to appease the public opinion. If the Supreme court is susceptible to public opinion, you can darn well expect Joe Torre to be.
@TRN
Oh and was the public opinion the only reason nothing happened to Couglan when he took out Kang? Or by public opinion do you just mean Torre’s opinion, who I guess doesn’t attend or watch Pirates/Cubs games?
Those are obviously cases quite different from this one. The NFL didn’t punish players for things BEFORE they changed the rules. They noticed a problem, changed the rules, then punished players for breaking them. You are right that public opinion has a big influence on CHANGING rules, but that’s not what’s going on here. People change the rules because the rules set a precedent and that precedent needs to be changed.
Like I said in other comments, I’m completely on board with making Utley’s slide enforced as illegal, but it’s never been called that way. It’s unfair to punish Utley mid-postseason for something that has gone unpunished forever. Change the rules in the offseason, and punish him and others if they still slide the way that way next year.
“Public opinion is the most important thing” would be a terrible precedent.
You might want to rethink that. Otherwise, what’s your argument against mass panics, crowd stampedes, or lynch mobs?
Precedent can’t be set until the precedent is set, it’s now set
Throwing at someone is much more dangerous than tackling a second baseman. I realize breaking your leg ended his season, but Robles throwing at Cameron Rupp’s head just a week prior was MUCH more negligent and dangerous. However Met fans dont care. Every teams shortstop has gone through this, Odor almost killed Carlos Correa in the final week of the season on a slide very similar. Utley was suspended because of the situation and the press. Sad, that it has reached that point.
Like others have said though, it does make a difference that it’s impossible to be 100% sure of intent with a pitcher so this should dampen the punishment a bit.
Except that was a pitch that got away, and not Robles throwing at someone. People should think before they post. Sad that it has reached this point.
I very much agree with the premise of this article; baseball is not a contact sport, and MLB should take steps to reduce instances where players have the option to bowl into another in order to break up any plays.
I don’t think Chase Utley should have been suspended, though. Was the play dirty? Definitely. Did Tejada get hurt? Unquestionably. Had anyone before this ever been punished for a similar play? Nope! Was the play legal? Pretty sure it was.
Suspending Utley is a reactionary move by MLB in an attempt to make themselves look like they’re doing something, even though there’s no legal precedent for them to make a move. What’s a shame is, in the preceding sentence, you can replace “Utley” with “Rice” and “MLB” with “NFL” and it would still be accurate. MLB does not want to go down the same path the NFL did with Goodell.
Establish the rule in the offseason, THEN you can start suspending players.
But there is a good argument that Utley did violate the written rule. The rulebook is very clear that a slide entails one leg and one buttcheek on the ground before contact is made. Utley did not fulfill this condition.
If the play was dirty, and a guy got hurt, and it’s arguably against the rules as written, and most fans and people within baseball feel this rule should be strengthened anyway, then we should take some corrective action. That’s not being reactionary, that’s having the courage to do something better late than never.
Doesn’t matter, the written rules don’t make calls on the field. This play has been considered legal by the umpires and the players for some time now. It’s unfair to single out Utley for something he has been taught to do and in fact has been lauded for by others in the game. In fact as the article mentions, the players thought Tejada should have been aware of the fact that Utley was the runner, meaning he has a reputation for this sort of thing. I don’t want to blame Tejada at all, its the playoffs and he was willing to put his body at risk to save the run. It’s just a bad situation that needs to be enforced better.
There is no question in my mind that Utley violated the written rule in the rulebook.
So what? Precedent exists for a reason. If something is legal for 749 people, then it should be legal for number 750 too. And the takeout slide has consistently been treated as legal for well over a century.
The written rule in the rulebook exists in the context of precedent established over a hundred+ years as to how that rulebook is interpreted. And I can’t see that Utley did anything that any of the precedent says is wrong.
If you are going to change the way a rule is enforced in a way that makes an action previously common and consistently treated as legal suddenly become illegal, then you owe it to people to PUBLICIZE the change in advance rather than punishing people for doing something you’ve basically told them they’re allowed to do.
Arguably, none of the “changes” for catcher rules changed anything in the rulebook significantly, deliberately blocking the plate or deliberately running into a fielder to interfere with him when he has the ball were both already illegal. Yet MLB publicized the change in policy as if it were a rule change, because it was a drastic change in how the rule was enforced.
The same is true for the takeout slide, if you are going to make it illegal after consistently treating it as legal, don’t do so by suddenly punishing someone, do it by announcing a policy change on how the rule is enforced and THEN punishing people who violate it.
There is also a precedent for the neighborhood rule, and another precedent that it isn’t reviewable. Both of those precedents were ignored.
It’s not often that they call a double play due to a take-out slide, but it’s happened before. There is definitely precedent for it.
“The rulebook is very clear that a slide entails one leg and one buttcheek on the ground before contact is made. Utley did not fulfill this condition.”
Where in the rule book, specifically?
I’ll hang up and listen.
MLB is chasing the NFL as fast as they can. Ruining your sport with new morality and safety regulations is all the rage these days.
I DEMAND TO SEE PEEPUL GET HURT WHO CARES IF IT RUINS THERE LIFE AND LIVELYHOOD I DEMAND BLUD
Ignore comments like that.
Shit, even MMA made some things illegal because the cons were much greater than the pros.
Y’know stuff like eye gouging, punching in the balls, headbutts in the top position, etc.
If the people making the negative comments about decreased violence or dangerous contact actually have to live with or participate in the activities, then I grant their opinion some credence. If not, then it’s just someone running their mouth.
I think he got the suspension for 2 reasons:
1) Torre knew the umpires blew the call which might have cost the Mets the game. MLB doesn’t do do-overs. So making the Dodgers play 1 man short for 2 games was a small way to try to make up for that. Of course, the Mets would prefer to have that game back. The suspension is little consolation for what they lost.
2) Torre wanted to defuse a volatile situation. He knows from his own experience managing in NY how worked up NY crowds can get. He probably wanted to avoid any disorder — and even violence. And he wanted to put the focus back on the game — not the tension between the two teams. Having Utley miss those 2 games at Citi helps defuse things.
A suspension is unprecedented, but I don’t know if that will be enough of a defense for Utley during his appeal.
if torre really wanted to make it up to the mets, suspend Kershaw for 3 games
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Suspending chokesure would hinder the mets chance of progressing. He is 1-6 in the last 7 games
“Chokesure”? Perhaps the worst name assigned to anything, ever. Narrowly edging out “Lucknals”.
Yeah, that’s a good point. If Utley plays tonight, there will be a riot. Even if Harvey and the rest of the Mets control themselves, Utley needs to be careful. Mets fans are FURIOUS.
Saying the penalty is unprecedented is essentially the same thing as, “it’s always been done like this”. This isn’t a legal matter, precedent isn’t necessary. If we want to change things a precedent has to be started. It’s fair to question the timing. It’s fair to say that this wouldn’t have happened if Tejada didn’t get hurt but if this incident is just the impetus behind something that should have been done sooner, is that really a bad thing? Utley’s slide did break the rules. Players aren’t supposed to go out of the base paths to initiate contact with a defender. He did.
Baseball has a long precedent of announcing changes before they actually make the change. “This year, we’re going to keep the hitters in the box” etc, etc. They could have simply made an announcement that the umpires had been reminded to correctly interpret and enforce the rule, you don’t necessarily need to kick thing off with 2 game playoff suspension.
That being said, I’m in favor of the suspension, as I always though this play made as much sense as the base runner tacking the first basemen in an effort to make him drop the ball on a ground-out (i.e.) none. Slide late and pop-up, that’s fine, but if you slide past the bag, just end the inning. Triple play, everyone is out. That happens twice in the regular season and we see these dangerous plays stop.
Good premise and article.
It’s not a person on person contact sport more accurately, and it’s what differentiates itself from the other major team sports.
One huge benefit of not having person on person contact is that it takes a way a big grey area of officiating. Most plays in the NBA, NFL, and NHL involve a situation where a foul or penalty can be called. This is also the case in soccer, where flopping and feigning injury is part of the game.
This incident shows how dealing with one issue ( person on person contact ) solves the other ( grey areas in officiating ).
lighten up francis
you just made the list
You can call baseball a non-contact sport although that is just inaccurate. Baseball is the only sport where there are no real rules about the contact, but it is a part of the game. It is not a penalty or a foul, it is just an occasional part of the game.
If you are a SS and you plan to turn your back on an incoming runner, you can expect to get hurt. I am pretty sure the same would apply to athletes holding the ball in any other sport than golf.
hot take, tough guy
(there are rules about interference and obstruction)
fact is they’ve never suspended anyone for this and there are some very similar comparisons recently— Holliday’s slide in 2012 NLCS was at least as bad, maybe worse. No punishment. You think the MLBPA is going to let the league office just start making stuff up as they go along? Because Joe Torre “looked at it from all angles” and decided a suspension was necessary? MLB is dead in the water on this ruling.
hot take, Vince and Moondog are right. I wonder if Utley would have just upended Tejada how much this would be talked about.
You mean if utley slide normally? Then no, this wouldn’t be tasked about
I see why this reaction has come about, what with Kang and moreso Tejada. I can’t say I agree with the title of this post though, after Babe Ruth ball, Legion and Division III, I was taught to sacrafice and lay it out for my teammates, and even more in higher leverage situations, in important games, especially when it became apparant my skills that once separated me from kids in HS and legion were exposed at a higher level (much like Utley now).
This is not to say anyone in college is out to hurt people, just that it happens all the time. Some guys are taught one way to play growing up. If Utley dogs it and simply slides into second and Ruben turns two (let’s give Chase the benefit of the doubt in not knowing like we did with replay and a full scale view of the play that there wasn’t a chance) he catches the same flak a Manny gets for curl-routing 4 feet off first.
I understand the outrage and how some people may think baseball isnt a contact sport, but it is. Double plays are broken up every summer in the hundreds. Many times in a worse fashion. Bases are blocked, hitters are pegged, catchers are slid(now only) into. This is how Chase was taught and 6 years ago people said “he’s so hard nosed”. Now that his skills have diminished and someone got hurt it’s “that was very egregious” “Chase is dirty” “This needs to be taken out of the game”. Personally I played for free or for my education and now I pay to play in adult leagues and wouldn’t have it any other way.
It isn’t a pretty part of the game, but if a couple high profile 3rd basemen, or catchers, or even runners break their legs or tear ligaments sliding into legs, or shin guards are we going to outlaw stealing 3rd base? or force catchers to only slap the glove in front of the plate? Are we going to ban inside pitching because God forbid someone gets severely wounded?(I still remember when Miggy took one off the jaw and ran to first).
The way I and many others I know were taught is to play the game hard. That being said I think Chase slid a little late, however I have no disagreement in how he slid into the thigh with his face. I think he should have been called out for not touching second when he kinda reached out. I think maybe he should be fined for ending Tejadas playoffs, but idk if I even agree with that. Obviously the times are a changing and I thank the baseball gods I was able to play at the time I was.
They are on the verge of outlawing headfirst slides home in my league, at that point I will probably start playing slow pitch.
Flame and downvote away.
A long time ago people were taught that blacks shouldn’t be allowed to play in the major league too.
Baseball is the only sport nonsensical enough to for players to be taught to take offense to an opposing player pimping a homerun, yet regard this kind of dangerous contact as “hard nosed play”. Or have pitchers retailiate by beaning someone, which is more dangerous than actually throwing punches.
Yet, the first black player slid hard all the time! I played in the 2000’s. I’m not recalling back to the times when guys threw 75mph fastballs, no one wore helmets, infielders didn’t have pockets in their gloves, and you could sharpen your spikes.
How you made it about race idk. But you did! Good for you.
Nice straw man, but my comment was not about race, it was about baseball needing to change move out of the dark ages in regards to outlawing these types of illegal hard contact (which by MLB rules should be considered interference) and pitcher retaliation.
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with your comments regarding pimping homeruns(which I think is more of a style of play and we can see that in who pimps them), and as far as pitchers retaliating it gets lost if the guy cant keep pitches below the ribs and has a DH. You’re dead on, pimping has been going on for a little while with it getting into theatrics now. I don’t consider it an issue unless baseball makes staring hitters down and celebrating, pumping your first etc after a K illegal.
I was just asking how you tied style/type of play/player into MLB not allowing people of color to play. IMO they’re two completely opposite types of issues. Allowing other races to play and upping the level of talent in the game is different than the way the game is played.
The point was obviously more that times change, and what was considered (in)appropriate years ago isn’t now.
That’s it. GoOppo was taught to risk hurting people in order to prevent an out. We all must go on accepting season and possibly career ending injuries because of what GoOppo was taught. Case closed.
Since that second part of the comment didn’t really have a point, were we even talking about take out slides 5 years ago? I don’t believe takeout slides are part of the dark ages of baseball. That’s my opinion, I just wonder how far well go. Should we give the pitchers an L screen? Like several ML players have said should we disallow players to drop their knee in front of bags, or limit catchers to simply slapping their glove in the baseline at plays at the plate?
Jeez Walter lol. Blatant sarcasm always brings so much. Thank you, for your awesome contributions.
Ah GoOppo, don’t get so worked up at someone ridiculing your stupid argument.
You’re basically just rehashing things that have been addressed by Jeff and commenters above. So thanks for your (non)contribution as well. Just because someone or everyone were taught to do something one way and that’s the way its been, even as little as 5 years ago, does not mean it should persist. Though what I said came with much more sarcasm than your original post, both we roughly equally logical.
Your other points about the L screen are similarly addressed in Jeff’s post and elsewhere. Its about striking a balance. For instance, wood bats are preferred in professional baseball because exit velocity of the ball is lower and thus gives a pitcher a little extra time to react (that’s part of why anyway, but not all of it). In amateur ball though, metal bats are used because they are cheaper and usually kids and the non-professionals aren’t hitting as hard those professional ball anyway.
Again, balance. How much of a hinderance to the game would an L screen create vs how much will it help protect pitchers? Well, it would probably be pretty damn jarring to the game and pitchers sustaining injury to comebackers is relatively rare compared to slides at second (or third and home if you lump collisions are the bases as one). If we had an L screen, how do we handle balls that come back and hit it? Is it a do-over? Is it in play? Is it foul? What if the catcher throws the ball into the screen trying to get the ball to second on a steal attempt? What happens when a pitcher trips and falls into the damn thing trying to field a bunt and THAT causes an injury?
Just stopping the most risky collisions at 2B or 3B, as we stopped them at home, doesn’t really come with any downside. All you loose is the collision itself.
huh? so we should stop sliders bc they cause Tommy John?; You lost me when you assumed I read everyone else’s comments. Don’t be so upset when someone calls you out for being…whatever it is youre being when you lay comment eggs just aimed at trolling. That’s it, when you’re taking someone’s gold pieces when they try to cross the bridge. Trolling
GoOppo, why is this hard to understand. Its about the balance. Is preventing X injury worth the consequences of removing Y action that creates the injury. And sliders causing TJS is a pretty shaky claim. Increased fastball usage and slider usage correlate with increase TJS, but its not a particularly large correlation. So, even if we did remove risky pitches, we’d still see plenty of TJS. Really the only way to prevent TJS is to pitch softball style.
And I didn’t expect you to read all the comments, but you should at least read the article you’re commenting on right? Because one major point of Jeff’s seems to have gone straight over your head.
And trolling or not, if you don’t like having your dump points ridiculed on the internet, I suggest not posting on the internet… If there is one thing we know about the internet is that dumb points will get trolled. Might as well take your beanball and walk to first son.
hot take!
another tough guy!
How do you feel about helmets? They weren’t required until 60 years ago, and even then, older players were grandfathered in and weren’t required to wear them. Should those be optional?
I was about done after the Buster Posey rule. If baseball is ok with many other players getting hurt at home but not Buster they should have put him at first earlier. After that I was done. Headhunting is about the only thing I have a problem with. Even the majority of the guys who play the game, the people who’s careers people are shedding tears over on this forum think it’s fine. But alas, fangraphs commenters know better how the game should be played.
In an earlier time, vicious collisions were common at all bases, but especially at first. The diehards argued it was part of the game; managers and owners were tired of losing players. An compromise rule was adopted experimentally: at first base only, the player could overrun the base without being called out. The expectation was that either the rule would be extended to all bases or abandoned. Instead, the compromise has stuck for over a hundred years. For those decrying any change, shall we return to collisions at first as well?
“Earlier last week, there was nearly a Didi Gregorius/Jose Altuve incident.”
I thought it was Correa that Gregorius bowled over?
I’m pretty sure it was Cortuve after they did the fusion dance actually
On opening day of this year, John Jaso’s wrist was injured by a fielder blocking the bag when he (Jaso) slid into second head first. If they change the rules to protect infielders, do the rules also need to protect the runners?
The risk of injury stealing second is big enough that it seriously decreases steal attempts for some players. Some portion of that injury risk is caused by the fielder blocking the bag with his leg, getting there late and putting his knee down on the runners hands, kneeing him in the head, or falling on him as he slides in.
In a case like Utley-Tejada, Utley definitely made an effort to create contact. But fielders make the same effort to create contact in every single game on any play that isn’t a force out. They use the threat of injury to their advantage against the runner.
I’m not saying the injury risk is the same for the fielder and runner, or that changing the rule is right or wrong. Just that if the runner can’t hit the fielder, it seems silly to let the fielder physically impede a runner sliding into the bag. I don’t see how you change one without the other.
If baseball does get rid of the takeout slide, there may be no need for the neighborhood play to continue to exist. So there is at least one definite plus.
Sure, extend the same rules at home plate to steal attempts and really all non-force plays at any bag. The path to bag has to be clear until you have the ball. If the fielder violates this, the runner is safe. If the runner goes out of his way to make contact, the runner is out, and on a double player so is the trailing runner. It won’t prevent everything, but it will help.
Should we disallow Tejadas 360 as well? So as to not turn your back completely on the play? Hopefully we won’t have 2 bases at every base. One for the runner, one so no one ever gets hurt on any play at a base. Well give everyone Yadiers oven mitts for when they try to steal to protect their fingers.
I don’t think you’d hear tons of objections to that, considering that’s what the neighborhood call was implemented to curtail.
Obviously, there is going to be some sort of contact on non-force plays. But what we are talking about here is a force play. Why should a runner who in most cases already out have the right to take a shot at the fielder?
You should be allowed to slide aggressively into the base to “threaten” the defender to break up a double play. Even though he was hurt on the play, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with Donaldson’s slide in game 1. He slid in hard to make sure the defender couldn’t turn two.
But what Utley did was neither a slide, nor into the base. That’s why plays like that need to be eliminated.
When player is running to second and going to be forced, what is his obligation if we are “doing away” with takeout slides? Stop running and go to the ground? Peel off and head toward the pitcher’s mound?
All Jeff has done here is make proclamations–“It doesn’t matter *if* …” Well, fine, but not likely to be convincing to those who disagree. More a cri de coeur.
Is the problem takeout slides or is the problem slides like Utley’s? I don’t see any way to operationalize getting rid of takeout slides, noble as the endeavor is. Sometimes guys are going to get hurt and it’s irrational to say we have to end it. May as well outlaw overhand pitching if guys getting hurt is all that matters. But there are criteria of reasonability that can be written into the rules if they aren’t already there and enforced if they are. Utley’s slide was not reasonable. It doesn’t follow that takeout slides have to go the way of the blue suede shoe. There are plenty of ways to break up a double play that look nothing like what Utley did and carry only an acceptable risk of injury.
I think most people are OK with a slide directly into a base. If your foot-and-butt-on-the-ground-slide makes contact with the base first but then continues forward, I’d be OK with that. Just like we have at home now. You have to slide, and it has to be to the plate, but it’s not like just because there’s contact everyone loses their mind. I think something similar could be enacted at every base. MI’s are trained to swipe the bag with a side step, so it would definitely reduce injury risk. But it would also force an MI to “dodge” the slide, creating extra motion to delay a DP. Seems like the best of both worlds to me.
Slide past the bag or miss the bag to one side or the other and the back runner is out, even if he’s already at first by the time you do it.
Also, if you take a path to the base that puts you more than a certain amount out of the baseline, the back runner is out. This is harder to determine, but a camera right down the line makes it easier to see in replay.
For example, as bad as Coghlan’s slide was, he slid into second base and wasn’t that far out of the baseline. It’s hard to argue that he shouldn’t be allowed to do that.
Couglan and Utley were about exactly the same distance from the bag. His slide was comically bad and should result in the same punishment.
On Coghlan’s slide it was more about how he raised his leg to create maximum contact that made it ‘dirty’, in my opinion. I mean he was obviously sliding late and well to the side as well, but if he doesn’t raise his leg and just does a relatively standard slide instead, the injury might have been avoided.
“Couglan and Utley were about exactly the same distance from the bag. His slide was comically bad and should result in the same punishment.”
Wrong !!! Look at it yourself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=24&v=JEj7slTe7a4
Don’t believe me, listen to Clint Hurdle describe it at 0:16
“the player pretty much slid into the bag, it’s not like he went out very much one way or the other”
Utley did not slide into the bag, he slid past the bag. Way past the bag.
His obligation is to propel himself as quickly as possible directly to second base, to try to beat the force out. He can do that by sliding directly into second base, or he can do that by running directly to second base, if he’s some sort of super human and can run full speed and then stop instantly.
That’s his obligation.
If he deviates from that, he’s interfereing, according to existing rules, and should be out.
Mets fans hoping something that had NOTHING to do with the outcome of the play would net them 2 outs? Somehow they were robbed? Really? Tejada never touched the bag and never would have made it close at first. The slide didn’t change any of that. They got zero outs and if Utley would have slide like a little girl they STILL would have gotten zero outs. Murphy made a terrible throw on an EASY ground ball. Be made at Murphy for botching the play if you’re gonna be mad at anyone.
I disagree with you. If Utley slid like “a little girl” or if there was no such thing as the neighborhood play, Tejada touches the bag.
I’m not in the “they deserved two outs” camp, but you can’t have something called a neighborhood play that is allegedly not reviewable, and then review it all of a sudden.
100% guarantee if the rule was “There is no neighborhood play, period: touch the bag” Tejada touches the bag. That’s it.
Tejada missing the bag had nothing to do with Utley. It was a bad throw that caused him to miss the bag. He should have stepped on the bag and secured the out. It only counts as a “neighborhood play” if they make an attempt at the DP. He didn’t. And even if Utley slid “normally”, he wasn’t going to get that ball off IMHO. Personally, I’d be in favor of getting rid of the take-out slide. But it exists and MLB allows it to exist and they’ve never suspended anyone for it. The Holliday slide from 2012 was at least as bad if not worse. He got nothing for that. the MLBPA won’t allow the league office to start making stuff up and changing how rules are enforced without being involved in the discussion. Peace.
Of course Utley has something to do with it. Tejada had to touch the bag AND get out of Utley’s way. So he kinda stabbed at it and tried to throw to first. This is the very reason the neighborhood play exists.
Of course Utley (just like every other runner) is going to try to break up the double play. But MLB will only consider it a neighborhood play if an attempt was made for the DP. In this case, they are looking at it simply as an attempted force out at 2nd. I’m not saying I agree with it but that’s how they have explained how the rule is enforced.
So he knew Utley was coming and 360’d, turned his back after not touching the base, and jumped into the path where he knew Utley was coming? So if a player knows the wall is coming up he should be allowed to stab at the ball and it counts? Utley should be allowed to prevent a double play, I don’t think he knew there was a bad throw and Tejada would ballerina around the bah
GoOppo, if this is the kind of criticism a rule change will encounter, there should be no problem getting it through!
Moondog had it right, he should have stepped on the base and moved away. Taken his out instead of triple axeling into a runner with no play IMHO
” It only counts as a “neighborhood play” if they make an attempt at the DP. He didn’t.”
Were we watching the same play? I thought it was crystal clear that Tejada was trying to catch the ball, spin around and throw to first. This is the first time I’ve seen it questioned. The only reason he didn’t continue attempting the DP is because Utley broke his leg.
I don’t even know how to begin with an argument that starts with “Tejada wasn’t trying to turn the DP”. No SS would make a play like that on a simple force out. What an insane statement. And even if it was a simple force, his actions were to avoid Utley.
And if you think it’s OK to collide like that for a simple force play, then I’d teach a bunch of linebackers how to bunt and have them do the same thing at first base … all season long.
Torre, Utley, the Dodgers, the Mets, and every player who reacted on TV or Twitter all referred to this as a double play. Only a crew chief saw it differently.
Wow, that was funny
Baseball is not a contact sport?
What’s ironic is that the Mets (especially their fans) are sooooo upset at this old school vicious take-out slide that they want to retaliate with an even more dangerous old school 98mph fastball to someone’s head. A little hypocritical, no?
Exactly, and it seems they’re even more mad that Utley will take one off the upper back or dodge (hopefully) a head hunter and simply run to first. Which almost completely takes the “satisfaction” they’re demanding out of it.
…and this is why they should find another way to voice their dissatisfaction.
Um, pitchers are suspended if the league things they are targeting a batters head…. and Utley was suspended because the league thought he was targeting a fielder… what’s hypocritical again?
What % of the time are pitchers suspended for hitting a batter? Less than 1% because it’s very hard to prove intent. It almost never happens. And what never EVER EVER (!!) happens is a player gets suspended for slide. And you only need to look at the Odor slide (which just happened) and the Holliday slide from 2012 (just as bad if not worse) for equal examples of the same thing with no suspension. So yeah, Mets fans are hypocritical. Harvey is dumb enough to retaliate I hope! Maybe Mets fans won’t hate him so much if he does. Either way, if they aren’t focused on winning this game, it’s a plus for Utley and the Dodgers.
Pitcher’s aren’t suspended very often mostly because they don’t go head hunting very often. But when they do go head hunting, it certainly seems to be they get suspended a good percent of the time. How much? I don’t know, but a lot more than 1%.
I get that slides at 2B weren’t considered a suspendible offense until yesterday and I’m kind of on the fence if that should even be done. Its a tough spot the league is in right now. They should have done something earlier and now that so much attention is on this issue they feel like they have to do something.
the fact they’re just now making Utley the vilian when he’s been doing this for years, and the playoffs have been like this always, and Kang just happened like yesterday, and etc etc. Not even headhunting, Utley wasng aiming to break Tejadas leg like headhunters are aiming high.
How’d that plus for the Dodgers work out?
The idea that the double play could not be made is contradicted by this image:
https://twitter.com/MeekPhill_/status/653610218035769344/photo/1
It clearly shows that at the point Tejada had the ball and Utley was tackling him, the batter was a good distance from first base — looks like about 15 feet to me.
It appears the umpires clearly made the wrong call on (1) it not being a neighborhood play and (2) Utley’s slide was not illegal and (3) the outcome of that play.
The outcome should have been at least 1 additional out. But there is precedence for there being 2 outs called and the inning ending with the Mets still up 2-1.
In August of 2007, there was a game between the Mets and Phillies with almost identical circumstances except it was the top of the 9th inning. Mets had runners on 1st and 3rd and there was 1 out. Shawn Green hits a ground ball up the middle, it’s fielded by Rollins who tosses it to Iguchi who is playing 2nd. Marlon Anderson takes Iguchi out with a hard slide and C.B. Bucknor ruled that Anderson interfered with Iguchi while he was trying to turn a double play. The result was Anderson AND Green were called out, and the run Endy Chavez scored didn’t count. Game ended right there.
So it’s not true that interference is never called on a play like this, and there is precedence for 2 outs being called in such circumstances.
The Mets were really screwed by the umpires in this game.
I don’t have a dog in this fight, but have been a baseball fan for 50+ years. The play was egregious and the lamentable decision that followed on the field has me questioning why and if I should continue to invest time my and emotional energy in this sport/business. As with emotional commitments, sometimes things happen that make you realize that you don’t want or enjoy the commitment anymore.
Where were you when Kangs leg was gruesomely hurt? That play is the one that broke the straw? Not a players strike or steroids or Clemens hitting piazza in the forehead (I think in the WS)? That play is pushing you out the door? That’s cool….
Didn’t you say you were considering quitting your adult baseball league because they might ban head first slides into home? That rule is pushing you out the door? That’s cool….
Rule 7.08 (b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball;
Rule 7.08(b) Comment: A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not.
If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two
out, the umpire shall declare the batter out.
I think the essenttial problem with the current rules is the comments regarding “umpire’s judgement” and the runner’s “intent.” Why not simply declare a runner who contacts a fielder on the other side of the base to be out if the contact occurs while the runner is not touching the base, or if he does not slide until past the base? Umpires have clearly been reluctant to call a batter out for “doing what he’s supposed to do”, but in the meantime the neighborhood play has been eliminated.
The rule you are looking for is 5.09.
Sheesh.
Personally, I think sliding into a MIF is perfectly fine if the runner and MIF get to the base at roughly the same time. I mean, what else is the runner supposed to do in that situation? Just concede the out to the defense? But Utley pretty much stopped running the bases to attack Tejada, and that shouldn’t be acceptable. They wouldn’t let him run into the outfield to tackle a CF who was trying to catch a pop up, why should they let him leave the baseline to tackle a 2B who was about to throw to 1st?
You aren’t going to be able to eliminate all contact, but you can do better than this. The runner should not be able to direct his slide at a fielder who is away from the bag. Let the runner go at the bag, or away from the bag–and the fielder–in an attempt to be safe.
Sorry Utley DID do something wrong. As most players state he slide way too late and way too high. Dirty. Also Umpires and replay officials should be fired. You deem play not neighborhood play (which is stupid) then if it i no and fielder is not standing in baseline and attempting a throw it HAS to be called interference. It is one or the other. Cost mets the game. Easy rule. Every official involved should be fired.
if a runner makes contact with a fielder anywhere but on the baseline, play should be called dead, runner should be out, and in the case of DPs the guy running to 1B should be out too. now “on the baseline” is always going to be open to interpretation, but the buffer area cannot be measured in several feet like it is now, or the bullshit “he could still reach the bag!”
Yes it’s true, Tejada should have known the player bearing down on him was known for dirty slides and wouldn’t make any attempt to touch the base and would only slide AFTER the base, thereby throwing his shoulder into his knee. Shame on him! Blaming the victim is just a great place to start any discussion. Look at how Tejada spun around all sexy like. Look at what Tejada was wearing! How could Utley resist mauling Tejada’s uniform?
Wow! Good job Jeff, just a few hours and look where we are.:)
every major sport has taken measures to protect players in defenseless positions.
the nfl did away with chop blocks on linemen, launching at receivers, leading with the crown in helmet to helmet contact, hitting qbs in the knees, etc.
the nba has done away with accepting hard fouls on anyone driving the lane, flagrants on plays where the player is hit from behind or the defender isnt making a play on the ball, etc.
the nhl has increased punishments on excessive high sticks and targeting the head or launching a player into the boards.
they do this not to make the game soft, but to keep the talent in the game while not diminishing the game. injuries are always a risk, but there are plays and stules where the cons outweigh the pros and the above plays fit the description.
This argument is weak. You do take away from the game when you make certain rule changes. Not seeing skilled, smart second baseman make awesome plays in order to turn the double play while under fire takes away from the game for more people than would admit. Tell me why we shouldn’t have plastic bats and wiffle balls if we could save a life by a doing so? This is using the same logic. Sports have danger, rules should be applied. But these are drastic changes to the sport being made with eliminating all contact and it is a slippery slope.
Well, groupthink is alive and well at fangraphs.
Couldn’t come with a solid argument, so you went with a weak reason for discounting an opinion different than yours.
But, yes, fangraphs are the un-thinking ones.
I guess I have to weigh in… Was Utley trying to break Tejada’s leg? Almost certainly not.
Was Utley trying to slide into Tejada as hard as possible? Yes.
Was this a legal slide under Rule 5.09(a)(13)? I don’t think so, but you could make an argument that it was. “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.”
I think it’s clear from players’ responses that many don’t consider this type of slide unsportsmanlike. And there is no concrete definition of when a runner has left the baseline (that I know of).
Should Utley be suspended? I don’t think so. No precedent for it – this rule has never been enforced. But he should have been called out, at least. Neighborhood play in effect when the fielder is trying to avoid having his legs broken.
Does this kind of slide belong in the game? No, I don’t think so. The runner should have to slide at the base, not at the fielder. Hopefully MLB will clarify the existing rule regarding what is considered interference with a fielder. Ideally we could both remove the slide-tackle and dispense with the neighborhood play in one fell swoop.
Really? I’m not sure what you’re reading. Most players have come out saying this WAS a dirty slide.
Why is it essential to eliminate physicality from baseball? It HAS been in the game for a long time, and everyone seems to talk and get their heartrate elevated when physical contact happens. People love the entertainment.
There are countless things to love about the game, I don’t see why watching athletes showing off their dexterity/ability in ALL forms has to be so forbidden.
With this reasoning, why doesn’t everyone vote for the guys using plastic bats and rubber balls to pitch with? You could prevent injuries this way! You could also have them run half speed and take even more injuries away? My guess is, most people wouldn’t enjoy the game nearly as much. Hypocrites. I miss seeing the agile guys like Jose Lind jump 6 feet in the air to avoid guys trying to take them out. I know that others do too but they are not ‘in the majority’ so they stay quiet.
Keep denying this simple fact. If the goal was really to eliminate the injuries, you don’t have sports. You just have adults fooling around. Many people would be very happy to put up with the injury risk to give their next of kin 2 or 3 or 10 generations of finacial security AND have the ability to retire before they even hit 40.
I would be very interested in someone coming up with an argument against using wiffle balls and plastic bats to prevent many injuries to fans and players alike. If you can do it without personal insults or sarcasm, that would be even better but I will wait. Remember, the logic for eliminating this rule is to prevent injuries.