Should Max Kepler Have Stayed at Third?

The point of the article was to say "wouldn't it be nice if we, as a society, might shift our priorities on what's important." To me, I didn't read it as anyone did anything they shouldn't do. Just, wouldn't it be nice if it were different? And maybe by calling attention to it, it's one small part of some long-term shift.

I just think too many are reading in more than that.

I've watched the replay a bunch of times.....do you (or anyone?) think that Martin's slide "caused" the injury as the articles states?  I don't think he even touched him until after the pitcher was passed the base and I think the damage had already been done.....

This is an illustration of a common fallacy today.  Pity is not “the right thing.”  Kepler staying at third base accomplishes nothing other than virtue signaling (aka, self aggrandization and vanity).

It would likely have a detrimental impact instead of “the right one.”  What’s to stop a player from faking injuries in those situations once they know that’s the outcome?

What you’re proposing is wrong and unjust.  Kepler going is right.  Always will be.  

Blah, blah, blah. You ALWAYS score on that play. This isn’t Ethics 101; it’s baseball. 

There's nothing wrong with Kepler scoring from third base on that play. First, he's a professional ballplayer, so he is expected to keep competing if at all possible, which it was. Second, he's a ballplayer, not a doctor, so there was nothing he could do for the injured player. Third, pro baseball does not offer time-outs in the middle of a play. Once Kepler scored, the play was over, so the ump called time out. Technically, nobody other than another fielder is allowed on the field during a live play. 

Time-outs during play are allowed in some sports, like soccer and hockey, but not in American football or major league baseball. Even in something like tennis, the point ends before a trainer runs onto the court. If I saw an opponent go down, I would not hit the next shot, but that's because it was not that important. I was not a professional.

Interestingly, Juliene could have dashed to second base immediately after his slide, but he did not. Might have made it, too...

12 hours ago, BK432 said:

The point of the article was to say "wouldn't it be nice if we, as a society, might shift our priorities on what's important." To me, I didn't read it as anyone did anything they shouldn't do. Just, wouldn't it be nice if it were different? And maybe by calling attention to it, it's one small part of some long-term shift.

I just think too many are reading in more than that.

If as a society we shift or priorities to what was important there would have to be some agreement on what was important. If it is a shift towards a concern for others, good luck with that

No.

What's to keep a player from faking an injury in order to stop the game? The game has gotta keep moving until time out is called. Hopefully Saucedo recovers quickly.

COME ON!!!!  These people aren't playing for a 5th Grade participation medal because their FEEWWWINGS will be hurt if they don't win.  These people are playing a professional sport for billions of dollars. 

If a player comes hard into 2nd base and avoids the tag, but the fielder gets knocked back, loses the ball, and there are no other infielders nearby, is the "right thing to do" to have the runner call himself out or go back to first???? NO!  He runs like hell to 3rd.  That's called playing the sport.

Grow up Matthew............

The people that are bringing up soccer as doing things differently are, frankly, wrong. If a player on the opposite team goes down with an injury, the other team has no responsibility to stop their attack. Where you see them kick it out of play to stop the game is when nothing is on and the official hasn't stopped play for it being a head injury. Then the other team yields possession back on the ensuing restart to resume conditions as before. But if someone is on a breakout and a player from the other team goes down behind the play, the team with the ball still gets to try and score. And the referees only stop the game if the player who goes down is in the middle of the action and at risk of further injury or they see it's a head injury (or they're able to ascertain it's potentially a serious injury). They don't just whistle a stop, and they specifically try not to disrupt an attack.

None of our sports stop the game immediately for injury unless it's something catastrophic or there's a specific rule for it (like premier league refs stopping the game for head injuries), and an ankle injury (or a knee or hamstring, etc) isn't that.

Kepler is supposed to score there. He's a professional, and that's his job. You should feel sympathy for the injured guy, but things happen.

Kepler did the right thing. 100%. Score, then worry. Every time.

The question should be asked to the umpire. In no other sport will a live play be stopped in a situation like this, unless a players life is in danger. And in this case there was absolutely no reason to believe it was. (I don't watch soccer so maybe I'm wrong). Do marathon runners all stop when one of them gets leg cramps? 

1 hour ago, The Mad King said:

The question should be asked to the umpire. In no other sport will a live play be stopped in a situation like this, unless a players life is in danger. And in this case there was absolutely no reason to believe it was. (I don't watch soccer so maybe I'm wrong). Do marathon runners all stop when one of them gets leg cramps? 

Soccer - LOL - they act like they have been shot if a another players uniform touches them.