It was a double fucking play

[Edgy MD]

If the Mets had swept, Mattingly would be fired the next day. And he still may taste the axe and taste it quickly if the Mets win this, so Utley, as shameful as his act was, may well have broken Tejada's leg, but saved Mattingly's neck. I'm not surprised a self-interested sense of honor has led him to cover Utley's back.

But he's embarrassingly wrong. I imagine even Yankee fans who see him as a secular saint would begrudge that.

If this post is irrelevant to you, please don't respond.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I don't need a skewer from them, but turning the tables and saying if
David Wright did that it would all peachy keen is fucking ridiculous.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Donnie Blowballs can kiss my fatted sac, I've lost all respect for him.

[TransMonk]

El Segundo Escupidor wrote: Not nearly as bad as Doug Glanville who blamed Tejada for the whole thing (video clip in second post of this thread).

So did Steve Sax. Ripken in the booth was halfway blaming Tejada.

[batmagadanleadoff]

d'Kong76 wrote: Dude's delusional... http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2015/10/los_angeles_dodgers_don_mattingly_gives_ludicrous.html

This is ironic to me 'cause I was thinking the same as Mattingly yesterday. Here's another thing I thought of: What if Tejada had time to set up at second base, and so Murphy's feed went to second base, and as a result of all of this, Utley didn't have to veer off path and instead went straight for second base, where Tejada was properly set up, but otherwise, with the same slide as Saturday's, with the same force and intensity, resulting in the same collision and the same injury to Tejada? Only this time, the collision happened right over the base, Meaning Utley's slide was totally legal. Would that be a dirty play? Because honestly, I'm struggling to see Utley's actual slide as dirty.

Here's another one: Would people be calling Utley's slide dirty if it was the same veered off path slide, leading to the same result, except that Tejada escaped uninjured?

Edited October 12, 2015 by Guest

[Ceetar]

TransMonk wrote: El Segundo Escupidor wrote: Not nearly as bad as Doug Glanville who blamed Tejada for the whole thing (video clip in second post of this thread). So did Steve Sax. Ripken in the booth was halfway blaming Tejada.

Ripken's been rough. Darling was very much in the "that was a dirty fucking slide" camp.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Sliding hard into second base isn't "dirty". Sliding hard into a fielder who was not at the base: dirty.

If Utley had made the same slide, in the same location, but Ruben escaped uninjured and still turned the double play, it would still have been a dirty slide, but nobody would have made an issue of it, because it wouldn't have mattered.

[dinosaur jesus]

Dude's delusional... http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2015/10/los_angeles_dodgers_don_mattingly_gives_ludicrous.html This is ironic to me 'cause I was thinking the same as Mattingly yesterday. Here's another thing I thought of: What if Tejada had time to set up at second base, and Murphy's feed went to second base, and as a result of all of this, Utley didn't have to veer off path and instead went straight for second base, where Tejada was set up, but otherwise, with the same slide as Saturday's, with the same force and intensity, resulting in the same collision and the same injury to Tejada? Only this time, the collision happened right over the base, Meaning Utley's slide was totally legal. Would that be a dirty play? Because honestly, I'm struggling to see Utley's actual slide as dirty. Here's another one: Would people be calling Utley's slide dirty if it was all the same, leading to the same result, except that Tejada escaped uninjured?

Pretty much what Benjamin Grimm just said.

In your first scenario, no, that's not a dirty play. Coming in high is pushing it, but he's entitled to the base, and it's Tejada's responsibility to get out of the way. It's the fact that he came in high and Tejada had gotten out of the way that makes it dirty; also the fact that Tejada couldn't see him, and Utley pretty clearly knew that.

In your second scenario, yes, people would be calling it dirty, and they'd still be complaining about the lack of an interference call. But there wouldn't be the same boiling rage.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Sliding hard into second base isn't "dirty". Sliding hard into a fielder who was not at the base: dirty. If Utley had made the same slide, in the same location, but Ruben escaped uninjured and still turned the double play, it would still have been a dirty slide, but nobody would have made an issue of it, because it wouldn't have mattered.

That makes sense. But I think I've been watching this brand of baseball, at least in the playoffs, since I was a kid. In the playoffs, especially in a tight game, a player who doesn't try to break up the double play is gonna get murdered by his teammates in the locker room.

[Edgy MD]

Then come in sliding, not running past the bag and then submarining. Hit dirt before the opponent's leg, slide within reach of the bag, and all's well with your teammates and the world.

I don't think Utley's dirty (necessarily, anyhow). Just a competitor who got carried away in the heat of battle.

[Frayed Knot]

When the back leg of a slider doesn't hit ground until it's on the far side of the bag and after he's already rammed into the fielder then it's not a clean slide.
Clean slides and breaking up DPs are not mutually exclusive terms.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Frayed Knot wrote: Clean slides and breaking up DPs are not mutually exclusive terms.

This, I get totally. I have trouble seeing Utley's slide as dirty because it's an extremely, extremely rare circumstance when the ump calls interference and enforces the automatic double play. The baserunner almost always gets away with that illegal slide. So if the umps essentially sanction that kind of slide -- which they absolutely do -- and you have a team like the Dodgers with their backs to the wall in a playoff game -- Utley's gonna make that play every single time. The odds are with him that the slide won't be flagged. And he got away with it in the end. Whatever punishment is meted out now will be a total joke in relation to what the Dodgers gained. So there's every incentive for Utley to make that play. Now I know that the slide is illegal. But dirty? Baseball, as it's enforced, essentially encourages that play.

I have little anger towards Utley. It's with the umps, especially under Saturday' setting, where the injury and the replay review created a large stoppage in the game, enough for the umps to properly reflect on the play. I also wonder if at least one of the other six umps thought interference should have been called but refrained from discussing the play with the second base ump because of the protocol to defer to the ump who made the call. This, we'll probably never know.

[Ceetar]

that'd be true if Utley simply slid normally and tried to displace Tejada's feet instead of essentially tackling him from behind AFTER he was out.

[Centerfield]

We need to make a video. Get 10-15 kindergarten kids. Show them the video. Ask each of them if they think the runner is aiming for the player or the base.

Each and everyone will answer that the runner is going after Tejada.

[A Boy Named Seo]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Clean slides and breaking up DPs are not mutually exclusive terms. This, I get totally. I have trouble seeing Utley's slide as dirty because it's an extremely, extremely rare circumstance when the ump calls interference and enforces the automatic double play. The baserunner almost always gets away with that illegal slide. So if the umps essentially sanction that kind of slide -- which they absolutely do -- and you have a team like the Dodgers with their backs to the wall in a playoff game -- Utley's gonna make that play every single time. The odds are with him that the slide won't be flagged. And he got away with it in the end. Whatever punishment is meted out now will be a total joke in relation to what the Dodgers gained. So there's every incentive for Utley to make that play. Now I know that the slide is illegal. But dirty? Baseball, as it's enforced, essentially encourages that play. I have little anger towards Utley. It's with the umps, especially under Saturday' setting, where the injury and the replay review created a large stoppage in the game, enough for the umps to properly reflect on the play. I also wonder if at least one of the other six umps thought interference should have been called but refrained from discussing the play with the second base ump because of the protocol to defer to the ump who made the call. This, we'll probably never know.

As I understand, even if all 6 umps thought it was interference after review, they still couldn't do anything about it because it's a judgement call, which is not reviewable anyway. That is dumb.

[Centerfield]

Yes, but the replay officials had the discretion to let the call stand or award him the base. They could have found that the evidence was inconclusive to overturn, they could have ruled he went out of the baseline, or they could have ruled that if the play had been called safe, Tejada would have likely tagged him before Utley returned to the bag.

Instead, with full knowledge of the Utley tackle, they went out of their way to reward the fucker.

Giving them back the second out is completely on the replay official. I want to know who he is. And like Pedro Martinez says, he should have to sit with a mic in front of him and defend his decision.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Guest

[Guest d'Kong76]

Centerfield wrote: We need to make a video. Get 10-15 kindergarten kids. Show them the video. Ask each of them if they think the runner is aiming for the player or the base. Each and everyone will answer that the runner is going after Tejada.

Even the Kalifornia kindergarteners!

[Centerfield]

d'Kong76 wrote: Centerfield wrote: We need to make a video. Get 10-15 kindergarten kids. Show them the video. Ask each of them if they think the runner is aiming for the player or the base. Each and everyone will answer that the runner is going after Tejada. Even the Kalifornia kindergarteners!

You can go to Nepal and get their kindergarteners!

[batmagadanleadoff]

A Boy Named Seo wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Clean slides and breaking up DPs are not mutually exclusive terms. This, I get totally. I have trouble seeing Utley's slide as dirty because it's an extremely, extremely rare circumstance when the ump calls interference and enforces the automatic double play. The baserunner almost always gets away with that illegal slide. So if the umps essentially sanction that kind of slide -- which they absolutely do -- and you have a team like the Dodgers with their backs to the wall in a playoff game -- Utley's gonna make that play every single time. The odds are with him that the slide won't be flagged. And he got away with it in the end. Whatever punishment is meted out now will be a total joke in relation to what the Dodgers gained. So there's every incentive for Utley to make that play. Now I know that the slide is illegal. But dirty? Baseball, as it's enforced, essentially encourages that play. I have little anger towards Utley. It's with the umps, especially under Saturday' setting, where the injury and the replay review created a large stoppage in the game, enough for the umps to properly reflect on the play. I also wonder if at least one of the other six umps thought interference should have been called but refrained from discussing the play with the second base ump because of the protocol to defer to the ump who made the call. This, we'll probably never know. As I understand, even if all 6 umps thought it was interference after review, they still couldn't do anything about it because it's a judgement call, which is not reviewable anyway. That is dumb.

I get that. They're bound by rules But I was wondering if, on the field, in real time, (not after the game) one of the other six umps thought interference should have been called. I think that the custom and practice among umps is that if the ump who made the call doesn't ask any of his colleagues for help, or for their opinions, the other umps stay out of it. I'm pretty sure that's how they operate but on the other hand, I have a vague and fuzzy memory of an ump making a bad call on one of those foul ball or Home Run plays and then one of the other umps stepped in to make the correct call. But again, I'm fuzzy on that one.

[Centerfield]

We will never know if any of the other umps thought so because Terry Collins did not come out of the dugout and immediately create a stink. Had he done so, there may have been a chance, small that it may have been, that they would have conferred and overturned the play.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I agree with that. I'm not saying that Terry should have gone all Billy Martin and gotten himself evicted for the sake of some theatrical point, but he should have pushed hard to state his case. Maybe he did, but I didn't see any evidence of that.

[Frayed Knot]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: This, I get totally. I have trouble seeing Utley's slide as dirty because it's an extremely, extremely rare circumstance when the ump calls interference and enforces the automatic double play.

I don't think it's all that rare.
I mean it's not a common situation which calls for that call to begin with. It has to be a DP situation, the runner has to get close enough to the pivot man by the time the flip is made, an illegal slide has to be made, and then said slide has to interfere with the completion of a DP. And even with all that, a certain portion of those situations are going to result in the 2B ump indicating an interference call (raises a hand) but never enforcing it because the DP is successfully completed anyway.

But, again, none of that has anything to do with whether lunging at a guy's legs is dirty or not.

[Frayed Knot]

As I understand, even if all 6 umps thought it was interference after review, they still couldn't do anything about it because it's a judgement call, which is not reviewable anyway. That is dumb.

The REPLAY process couldn't overturn the non-interference call.
There's nothing preventing the umps on the field from huddling up and correcting it on their own.



And to address CF's point about putting Utley back on 2nd: that's really a separate issue. The replay guys are strictly looking at whether Tejada's toe touched the bag. Once they rule 'No' he's ruled safe.
The system is flawed in that it forces the umps to pretend they can recreate where guys would have been had the "wrong" call not occurred in the first place, but that's the way it's written so that's the way they need to work it.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I imagine that if there hadn't been an out call Utley would have scrambled back to second base and Tejada, face down in pain on the ground, wouldn't have been able to tag him out. (Where was the ball when all this was happening? Was it still in Ruben's glove? Or did he get some kind of a throw off?)

[Centerfield]

That's not true (addressing FK Post). They had the discretion. It's in my earlier post. Here's the rule:

Correcting an Incorrect Call
Consistent with Official Baseball Rule 8.02© (formerly Rule 9.02©), if Replay Review results in a change to a call that had been made on the field, the Replay Official, to the extent feasible, shall exercise his discretion to place both Clubs in the same position they would have been in had the call on the field been correct. This shall include placing runners where he thinks those runners would have been at the conclusion of the reviewed play if the reviewed call had been correctly made in the first instance, disregarding interference or obstruction that may have occurred on the play, failures of runners to tag up based upon the initial call on the field, runners passing other runners, missing bases, etc.

The replay official could have ruled that the toe did not hit the base, but that since Utley had gone that far past the base, that he would not have gotten back in time.

[Ceetar]

As I understand, even if all 6 umps thought it was interference after review, they still couldn't do anything about it because it's a judgement call, which is not reviewable anyway. That is dumb. The REPLAY process couldn't overturn the non-interference call. There's nothing preventing the umps on the field from huddling up and correcting it on their own. And to address CF's point about putting Utley back on 2nd: that's really a separate issue. The replay guys are strictly looking at whether Tejada's toe touched the bag. Once they rule 'No' he's ruled safe. The system is flawed in that it forces the umps to pretend they can recreate where guys would have been had the "wrong" call not occurred in the first place, but that's the way it's written so that's the way they need to work it.

but who reviews if it's a reviewable play? is THAT reviewable? had Tejada thrown the ball as he fell would they have decided 'oh, definitely neighborhood play, can't review'? is it only because of the illegal slide made by a player not currently permitted to be on the field because he was out by virtue of tagging the bag OR abandoning his attempt to reach second (your choice) that allowed them to review a portion of the play? Cause the whole thing is bullshit if you're only not able to review the plays where the MI actually is able to get the throw off.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I imagine that if there hadn't been an out call Utley would have scrambled back to second base and Tejada, face down in pain on the ground, wouldn't have been able to tag him out. (Where was the ball when all this was happening? Was it still in Ruben's glove? Or did he get some kind of a throw off?)

the ball was in his hand, clearly indicating he was in the process of turning a double play.

[Centerfield]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I imagine that if there hadn't been an out call Utley would have scrambled back to second base and Tejada, face down in pain on the ground, wouldn't have been able to tag him out. (Where was the ball when all this was happening? Was it still in Ruben's glove? Or did he get some kind of a throw off?)

How can we assume that? From all replays I have seen Utley seems completely unaware that there is an object called "Second Base" and is equally unaware where such object may be.

[Centerfield]

You know what? That's unfair. I'm sure Utley knows that there is a thing called second base. He just thinks it's located in Tejada's calf.

[Edgy MD]

Despite the injury, Tejada retained the ball and his composure throughout his tumble, as deep in pain as he was. He was in between Utley and the bag and didn't plant his face in pain until Utley started jogging off the field, the play apparently dead. I am 78% certain that he would have made the play if the out call wasn't given. He landed looking right at Utley who is within arm's reach and may even be touching knees with him.