Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
Sign in to follow this  
Gil

Utley-Tejada Slide, Replay

Recommended Posts

Thoughts? It's always tough to conflate TV cameras with angles from down on the field, but Utley's slide looked a lot tamer from the B/1B med-high cam than from the C/3B med-high cam. Still, as far as willful and deliberate goes (knowing it's a textbook malicious contact play for the lower levels), I have:

In sliding to a base, the runner should be able to reach the base with his hand or foot (hand was able).
A runner who, in the judgment of the umpire, contacts or attempts to make contact with a fielder with a slide or roll block that is not a bona fide effort to reach and stay on the base may be called out for interference, and, when appropriate, a double play may be called (no effort to stay on base).
Any definite change in direction by the runner to contact the fielder would be considered interference (no definite change).
If a runner hits the dirt, slides, and rolls, it does not constitute a rolling block unless the runner leaves his feet and makes contact with the fielder before the runner slides on the ground. If the initial contact is with the fielder instead of the ground for the purpose of breaking up a double play, it is a roll block (hits ground barely before contact with F6).

Conclusion: Utley didn't look like he was trying to stay on the base, so interference is possible, but not mandatory. The slide wasn't a blatant roll block, but that's tough to gauge from behind R1. I do know it would be a violation of the HP collision rule if it was at that base.

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/11493214/v521658783/dodgers-chase-utleys-slide-injures-mets-ruben-tejada

Edited by Gil: Owner - UEFL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

I think that Cal brought up a good point on the broadcast about how it looked a lot worse than the normal everyday hard slide that is virtually the same kind of slide you see on a day to day basis was because Tejada was turned around where in most cases you see the fielder getting hit from the front and they are able to jump over the fielder and avoid any serious collision. That being said I think there is a case for interference here but at the same time I think you could argue that it was just a normal big league slide into 2nd and that it was just a normal baseball play. In real time it looked like Utley was going for the bag especially from that 1B side camera angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This play has been all over twitter since it happened. The constant use of the term "basepath" in those tweets is headslammingly abundant. Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a jaded Mets fan, so take this with a few grains of salt. I'm angry at the call here. 

1) I understand that interference is a judgment call, but I absolutely have it in this play. I don't see this as a "hard" slide. It was a late slide, a high slide, and was aiming at a second baseman whose back was to the runner and was blindsided. In every non-professional level, this is an out (and in FED and NCAA, I have an ejection here), and it's enforced in all levels that we do. I'm reminded of a Marlon Anderson slide that was called interference (photo here). In the same vein, it was a runner targeting a fielder. 

I hope this spurs some sort of slide/avoid rule in the offseason, or at least give points of emphasis. There are clean slides and hard slides, and there are slides that are designed to injure. 

2) I have no idea how the neighborhood play can't be invoked. When he's being hit, the shortstop had taken the ball out of his glove, and was beginning to throw to first. I have zero idea that it's not a neighborhood play. I really don't. Shortstop, having fielded the ball (yes, it was high), is coming back down to tag the bag before throwing. 

3) This one falls squarely on the replay officials, but I think more importantly, how can they take a play in context and then completely reverse it, especially because Chase Utley never touched the base? If the ruling on the field is that Tejada's foot was off the bag, you can't just automatically give R1 the bag having never touched it. This isn't any stupid "abandonment" argument. But, had U2 called F6 off the bag immediately, he'd still be at risk to be tagged out. 

Here's where Chase Utley winds up after taking out Ruben Tejada. He's no where near the base, and with a play continuing, I'd easily say he'd be tagged out if play continued. 

Screen Shot 2015-10-11 at 8.26.36 AM.png

Consider this play at the plate: Runner trying to score has an acrobatic slide to avoid the tag. He never touches home plate, and his avoidance of F2 takes him away from the plate (something like this clip). He's called out. On replay, it's determined that F2's tag missed him. Should he be awarded home, or should the replay official use discretion about whether or not the call exists in a larger environment? 

I think, in this call, you have to uphold the call, because the out call ended the action on the play, where continuing action was necessary to have a resolution. 

Edited by TheRockawayKid
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In no manner, way, shape or form is this a legal slide.  Utley does not even BEGIN his, so called, slide until he is at the base, which he never actually touched.  This was a hard slide, meant to take out the opposing player.  Did he mean to hurt Tejada, probably not, but only Utley knows.

if Utley had slid BEFORE the base, then there would be nothing.  The crew blew this one and Joe Torre is Reviewing the play further.  There will be something that comes out of this.  Unfortunately for the Mets, this play has probably cost them not only the game, the series.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marginal but I think legal given the current rule.  MLB is reviewing.

I don't understand the broken leg because Tejada's feet were both in the air at the time of contact and he landed on his back and side. May be an underlying contributor. Jermaine Dye and Mark Teixeira both broke legs while fouling a ball off them while at bat.

There is no more neighborhood play. Get over it. Utley was ruled safe on replay because Tejada didn't touch the base - missed by only an inch or two. (Bet some of you missed that part).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marginal but I think legal given the current rule.  MLB is reviewing.

I don't understand the broken leg because Tejada's feet were both in the air at the time of contact and he landed on his back and side. May be an underlying contributor. Jermaine Dye and Mark Teixeira both broke legs while fouling a ball off them while at bat.

There is no more neighborhood play. Get over it. Utley was ruled safe on replay because Tejada didn't touch the base - missed by only an inch or two. (Bet some of you missed that part).

How can you say there is no more neighborhood play when it's explicitly in the rules? The throw didn't take him off the base - safe or out shouldn't have even been reviewable. IMO it was a dirty, illegal slide that had no intention of involving the base at all, but even if marginally within the rules it's a cheap shot. It's an anachronism that I believe needs to be removed from the game, just like taking out the catcher. Yea, it's been that way since the start of baseball. So what....a home run going over the fence after 1 bounce was originally there too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thoughts? It's always tough to conflate TV cameras with angles from down on the field, but Utley's slide looked a lot tamer from the B/1B med-high cam than from the C/3B med-high cam. Still, as far as willful and deliberate goes (knowing it's a textbook malicious contact play for the lower levels), I have:

In sliding to a base, the runner should be able to reach the base with his hand or foot (hand was able).
A runner who, in the judgment of the umpire, contacts or attempts to make contact with a fielder with a slide or roll block that is not a bona fide effort to reach and stay on the base may be called out for interference, and, when appropriate, a double play may be called (no effort to stay on base).
Any definite change in direction by the runner to contact the fielder would be considered interference (no definite change).
If a runner hits the dirt, slides, and rolls, it does not constitute a rolling block unless the runner leaves his feet and makes contact with the fielder before the runner slides on the ground. If the initial contact is with the fielder instead of the ground for the purpose of breaking up a double play, it is a roll block (hits ground barely before contact with F6).

Conclusion: Utley didn't look like he was trying to stay on the base, so interference is possible, but not mandatory. The slide wasn't a blatant roll block, but that's tough to gauge from behind R1. I do know it would be a violation of the HP collision rule if it was at that base.

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/11493214/v521658783/dodgers-chase-utleys-slide-injures-mets-ruben-tejada

I have not seen much application of the "bona fide attempt to stay on base" criteria by MLB umpires. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that Cal brought up a good point on the broadcast about how it looked a lot worse than the normal everyday hard slide that is virtually the same kind of slide you see on a day to day basis was because Tejada was turned around where in most cases you see the fielder getting hit from the front and they are able to jump over the fielder and avoid any serious collision. That being said I think there is a case for interference here but at the same time I think you could argue that it was just a normal big league slide into 2nd and that it was just a normal baseball play. In real time it looked like Utley was going for the bag especially from that 1B side camera angle.

Made no effort to stay on the bag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marginal but I think legal given the current rule.  MLB is reviewing.

I don't understand the broken leg because Tejada's feet were both in the air at the time of contact and he landed on his back and side. May be an underlying contributor. Jermaine Dye and Mark Teixeira both broke legs while fouling a ball off them while at bat.

There is no more neighborhood play. Get over it. Utley was ruled safe on replay because Tejada didn't touch the base - missed by only an inch or two. (Bet some of you missed that part).

Looked like the leg made contact with his elbow.  Might have happened there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you say there is no more neighborhood play when it's explicitly in the rules? The throw didn't take him off the base - safe or out shouldn't have even been reviewable. IMO it was a dirty, illegal slide that had no intention of involving the base at all, but even if marginally within the rules it's a cheap shot. It's an anachronism that I believe needs to be removed from the game, just like taking out the catcher. Yea, it's been that way since the start of baseball. So what....a home run going over the fence after 1 bounce was originally there too.

Agree. The time has come. MLB needs a FPSR. Of course, they won't do the right thing and just copy the NCAA version, they'll try to write their own and it will be as convoluted as the play at the plate rule.

Between MI's having to make sure they make contact with the bag, and the fact that these guys play everywhere with FPSR's in effect until they get to pro ball and maybe aren't as good as avoiding take out slides as older players were, who played from high school on up learning how to avoid take out slides, it's high time to revise this. Maybe as little as changing it to the runner's legs/feet must make contact with the bag instead of "within reach" is all that's needed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A harder slide than normal. It's the postseason and that play at first is a run. Tough but understandable and ok at this level. FPSR? In MLB? Who cares if kids can't do that. Jesus let's just but up plexiglass in both batter boxes so no more HBP, oh and nets around the entire field of play so Susie-Selfie doesn't get hit by a homerun ball. He gets annihilated, no neighborhood play protection? I swear they are lying; there are no umpires in New York, only ESPN lackeys.

Oh.

And

F this overturn. F this overturn. F this overturn.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F this overturn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why was is this even allowed. Unbelievable!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate instant replay, the reason, all these nick picky he came a inch off or was away from the bag by an inch.. or on his pop slide he came into the air for a brief second. It's ruining baseball. 

 

The slide was dirty, extremely late. In HS and NCAA, that's a double play with an ejection. 

 

I still don't like it in MLB, a lot because in youth baseball and HS, they try doing this. Or you'll hear coaches yell break it up.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

utley suspended 2 games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't just a hard slide.  He never even touched the bag and never tried to stay on the bag.  He could have broke up the dp without breaking the rules and he did.  I like Chase Utley, but he deserves this suspense.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't just a hard slide.  He never even touched the bag and never tried to stay on the bag.  He could have broke up the dp without breaking the rules and he did.  I like Chase Utley, but he deserves this suspense.

He didn't break the rules. Nothing requires him to touch the bag nor stay on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why was he suspended for an illegal slide?

Good question? There have been a few illegal slides in the regular season. No suspensions. A guy does what some umpires have been no calling all season long and he gets suspended? And he doesn't get to read the MLBUM but the calling umpire should have read it?

Joe Torre is asleep at the switch. While they are pondering this one maybe they will give some guidance on quick pitching from a sideways stance or any othe stance?

Edited by Jimurray
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why was he suspended for an illegal slide?

Because Torre is making SH*# up as he goes. This has happened DOYC-knows-how-many times this season alone, not to mention with this particular runner, and with no call and no suspensions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made no effort to stay on the bag.

I agree he made no effort to stay on the bag. But neither do most big leaguers when they go into second to break up a double play. I realize now after reviewing my original post that I wasn't clear on what I felt about the play. It was late and I wasn't proof reading to make sure I got my point across. I 100% believe that Utley's "slide" was an act of interference. I do think though that given Guccione's angle on the play would have made it extremely difficult to see in real time because from the first base side camera angle at full speed he does appear to be reaching for the base. There also wasn't much he could have done about it differently as far as getting a better angle because the way the play developed he would have had know way of knowing the throw was going to be high and bring Tejada to the backside of the bag. So in summary I do think an act of interference was made, but I also can see why it was missed. It was a bit of a bastard play for lack of a better term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't break the rules. Nothing requires him to touch the bag nor stay on it.

Nothing requires him to touch the bag nor stay on it is true. However that's only one part of the criteria in which we use to judge interference. The most important part of the rule is the part about "willful and deliberate act to break up a double play." Can you say that Utley's slide was anything but a willful and deliberate act to break up a double play? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×