Jump to content
  • Create Account

Utley-Tejada


USAFChief
 Share

 

What I find ironic is that in other places/cultures bat flipping is seen as fun and they'd never disrespect another player with a takeout slide, but here we flip those reactions.

We commend the intent to hurt and condemn celebrating as the "respectful" way to play. How ass backwards.

I don't see a big deal with either thing to be honest.

 

But if you want to change the rule, do it. Was it a dirty slide? Probably, does it deserve a suspension? Probably not, but Utley has done nothing else than 1000 other guys haven't done/would have done. I still go back to the point if it was a Twin doing it and it would have helped score the tying run would any of us complained? Prob not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not to mention I think most peoples frustrated reactions is less to do with what Utley did(though thats a big part of it) and more to do with how the umpires blew the call in everyway possible and baseball doubled down on that.

Yeah, him being safe at 2nd is just ridiculous, I will agree all day with that! The proper call IMO was: Runner safe at home and 1st, runner out at 2nd.

Likely Mets get out of that inning before giving up another run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't see a big deal with either thing to be honest.

 

But if you want to change the rule, do it. Was it a dirty slide? Probably, does it deserve a suspension? Probably not, but Utley has done nothing else than 1000 other guys haven't done/would have done. I still go back to the point if it was a Twin doing it and it would have helped score the tying run would any of us complained? Prob not.

 

I would have - I hate this nonsense no matter who does it.  Everytime Bert whines about someone "just trying to raise their batting average" I have to strongly consider turning on Dan Gladden.  (UGH!)  I was also clear that the Twins were being whiney babies about the bat flip thing the other day.

 

It has nothing to do with loyalty, this kind of stuff has no place in the game.  

 

And, just think about it - part of the demise of our run came from our first baseman trying to take someone out and getting a concussion for his troubles.  Get rid of it - I don't care who is doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes it is sad that Tejada got hurt, but I guarantee you that 100% of MLB slides hard to take the SS out on that play.

 

You are probably right, and that is the problem. 

 

That said, I think the suspension is BS because it is an unannounced change in the rules for the players.  One of the games on TV showed at least 3 similar slides(maybe worse, except for the result) that happened just in the last week, and there was absolutely no fuss made over them.  When someone finally, inevitably gets hurt doing what has always been allowed, it's the player's fault and he gets suspended?

 

The only logical rational I can come up with is Torre is pulling for the Dodgers and wants to get Utley out of the lineup any way he can. 

 

 

Edited by gil4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't think anyone is saying you shouldnt be able to break up double plays, provided you actually make a baseball play, like a slide. These aren't even slides, they're as levi keeps say chop blocks, or just tackles or flailing recklessly into guys legs. Maybe the rule isn't as black and white and is up to the umpires discretion. Thats ok, thats what its like in every sport.

.

That's what we have now and has led to this discussion.  So we slightly re-write the rule and next year someone will be called out for interference on a similar play and we'll get another round of discussion on this.  If we're going to allow contact sometimes there is going to be contact that some people think goes too far (and others not enough).  So we could adopt the Japanese version and eliminate all contact or we could let the umpires make the call at the moment it happened, understanding that we won't always like their calls.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having watched the slide over an over, how can anyone say the intent was not to hit the bleep out of the INF, and to hit him hard? How can anyone argue he was trying, at all, to get to 2B? It was 100% a dirty slide. The only intent was to hit the INF hard. The ends, trying to break up a double play, do NOT justify the means.

 

And no, I don't want someone that would do whatever it took to win, I want them to play in the rules, and this was against the existing rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Having watched the slide over an over, how can anyone say the intent was not to hit the bleep out of the INF, and to hit him hard? How can anyone argue he was trying, at all, to get to 2B? It was 100% a dirty slide. The only intent was to hit the INF hard. The ends, trying to break up a double play, do NOT justify the means.

And no, I don't want someone that would do whatever it took to win, I want them to play in the rules, and this was against the existing rules.

I don't think anyone is suggesting he wasn't trying to hit the bleep out of the infielder.  I think we all agree he was.  The question becomes whether it was a legal play.  The umpires on the spot thought it was legal (as did most players in a clearly unofficial poll).

 

So now it developed into was it "dirty" (which is an 'eye of the beholder' thing) and what should be done to make sure it never ever happens again - which would require us to adopt a Japanese version and eliminate take out slides.  (one could say, 'we changed the rules on catchers, so it would work here' but that's not quite right.  We changed the rules on catchers but there still has been contact at home plate - which has led to injuries and questionable calls. If the intent is to eliminate contact it's the Japanese version.  Otherwise, it's just a small rule rewrite and more arbitrariness).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule already exists....slide to get to the base, not out of the base path to cripple a guy (or make him afraid, or hit him hard). Slide as hard as you want when trying to get to the base.....that's not what Utley did.

 

Oh, and lots of players said Harper is over rated, in an informal poll. Some players said it was ok to choke Harper. Uhhhhh, no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone is suggesting he wasn't trying to hit the bleep out of the infielder.  I think we all agree he was.  The question becomes whether it was a legal play.  The umpires on the spot thought it was legal (as did most players in a clearly unofficial poll).

 

So now it developed into was it "dirty" (which is an 'eye of the beholder' thing) and what should be done to make sure it never ever happens again - which would require us to adopt a Japanese version and eliminate take out slides.  (one could say, 'we changed the rules on catchers, so it would work here' but that's not quite right.  We changed the rules on catchers but there still has been contact at home plate - which has led to injuries and questionable calls. If the intent is to eliminate contact it's the Japanese version.  Otherwise, it's just a small rule rewrite

more arbitrariness).

 

I'm not sure how you could be more wrong.

 

There already is a rule on the books designed to prevent runners from interfering. The example specifically mentions the turn man on double plays. Just start enforcing existing rules. If a runners actions are intended to reach base safely, no problem. If his actions are intended to interfere, he's out, along with the batter in a DP situation. Umpires ALREADY call interference in every othe situation.

 

Nobody is saying there won't be contact. Simply let natural contact occur from a runner sliding as hard as he wants DIRECTLY INTO SECOND BASE.

 

Which, BTW, is how they play in Japan. I wonder if you've ever seen a JBL game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm not sure how you could be more wrong.

There already is a rule on the books designed to prevent runners from interfering. The example specifically mentions the turn man on double plays. Just start enforcing existing rules. If a runners actions are intended to reach base safely, no problem. If his actions are intended to interfere, he's out, along with the batter in a DP situation. Umpires ALREADY call interference in every othe situation.

Nobody is saying there won't be contact. Simply let natural contact occur from a runner sliding as hard as he wants DIRECTLY INTO SECOND BASE.

Which, BTW, is how they play in Japan. I wonder if you've ever seen a JBL game.

-sigh-

 

Yes, there is a rule.  Now we'll say, let's enforce it (even though the umps have enforced it at times and in this case, declined to do so).  So we'll still have times where the umps allowed contact and a fan base will scream and bitch and moan that it was an illegal slide and interference should have been called and we'll compare that slide to the Utley one or the Holliday one.

 

The complaining here is that the umps didn't make a discretion call the way most would like.  That will never change so long as there is wiggle room on a call.  We can move the line so that Utley's slide is clearly way over but something else will end up being close to the new line that will draw just as much outrage.  Maybe the next argument is that the shortstop who injured Plouffe didn't do enough to protect the baserunner.  Who knows.  But as long as we allow contact, there are always going to be plays that some people object to.  If we want to allow those, then we have to accept that occasionally the umpires will allow a play that some people don't like.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-sigh-

 

Yes, there is a rule.  Now we'll say, let's enforce it (even though the umps have enforced it at times and in this case, declined to do so).  So we'll still have times where the umps allowed contact and a fan base will scream and bitch and moan that it was an illegal slide and interference should have been called and we'll compare that slide to the Utley one or the Holliday one.

 

The complaining here is that the umps didn't make a discretion call the way most would like.  That will never change so long as there is wiggle room on a call.  We can move the line so that Utley's slide is clearly way over but something else will end up being close to the new line that will draw just as much outrage.  Maybe the next argument is that the shortstop who injured Plouffe didn't do enough to protect the baserunner.  Who knows.  But as long as we allow contact, there are always going to be plays that some people object to.  If we want to allow those, then we have to accept that occasionally the umpires will allow a play that some people don't like.

 

OK, you win. We'll still have a chance at controversy. We'll also have a chance at fewer broken legs and concussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

OK, you win. We'll still have a chance at controversy. We'll also have a chance at fewer broken legs and concussions.

If you're really worried about injuries, this isn't the place to start.  But baseball could (and probably will) try to change the take out slide rule a bit and it won't make much difference, just like the catching change didn't.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, don't fix anything because you can't fix everything? That's not logic. Don't fix anything because someone still wont' think the world is good enough? That's not logic.

 

There is a rule. Leagues decide how much to enforce rules all the time. The argument you are making is the same argument made about enforcing the strike zone, frankly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If you're really worried about injuries, this isn't the place to start.  But baseball could (and probably will) try to change the take out slide rule a bit and it won't make much difference, just like the catching change didn't.  

Are you serious?  You don't think the catching rule change is saving catchers from big hits and injuries? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Actually, the main reason they slide is so they don't die.  The short stop or second baseman can throw the ball through a runner and then both runners would be out.  Cal Ripkin was great at that.

 

The obvious reason for the take out slide is to prevent a second out (as opposed to your other instances).  If you want MLB to adopt a Japanese version, fine.  That's what you'd like.  I think that would be boring but to each his own.

 

Those are all reasons WHY takeout slides happen, not why they should be allowed. I'm looking for a reason for why you think a slide like Utley's should be allowed but other forms of contact and interference, like the ones I listed, should not and are not.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Wait, don't fix anything because you can't fix everything? That's not logic. Don't fix anything because someone still wont' think the world is good enough? That's not logic.

There is a rule. Leagues decide how much to enforce rules all the time. The argument you are making is the same argument made about enforcing the strike zone, frankly.

That's the point - as long as you leave it open for interpretation, you're going to have to accept calls you don't like. The umpires and many players thought the slide was legal.  (You and many others do not).  Umpires do call interference (although they do seem more inclined to call it when guys are out of the baseline). We can (and probably will) move the line but it won't change the discussion if we still allow contact.  Someone will take it further than others think is right - look at home plate collisions.  The Twins/Royals game late this year was decided in part on a non-interference call on Suzuki that upset Royals fans a great deal.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Those are all reasons WHY takeout slides happen, not why they should be allowed. I'm looking for a reason for why you think a slide like Utley's should be allowed but other forms of contact and interference, like the ones I listed, should not and are not.

What were you're other suggestions?  Plowing over a fielder in the baseline?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's what we have now and has led to this discussion.  So we slightly re-write the rule and next year someone will be called out for interference on a similar play and we'll get another round of discussion on this.  If we're going to allow contact sometimes there is going to be contact that some people think goes too far (and others not enough).  So we could adopt the Japanese version and eliminate all contact or we could let the umpires make the call at the moment it happened, understanding that we won't always like their calls.

I don't know the Japanese game, but a "malicious contact" rule already exists in the US, at least at the high school level that I am familiar with.  Slide into the base and you're fine, even if you contact the fielder.  Hasn't caused any confusion or controversy that I am aware of.  Pretty simple really, especially compared to the new MLB home plate collision rules (which have also been implemented pretty seamlessly).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, players agreed that it is the way baseball has been played and that it is allowed under the current unwritten rules.  That doesn't mean that it should be part of the game.

 

Where can I find the list of current unwritten rules that supports this statement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

Featured Video

×
×
  • Create New...