Centerfield

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Centerfield wrote: I think you are missing the gist of the rule. I agree that in nearly every takeout slide there is a possibility that a runner attempts to contact the bag, but is not able to. The rule is stating you cannot have takeout slides any more. (Directed at batmags) You're just stating the conclusion. I think I'm losing the nuances of this argument. My point is this. Jayson Werth was not sliding to get to second base. He was sliding at Neil Walker with the intent to disrupt his throw. The path he took clearly demonstrates this. Therefore it's interference. A player trying to slide to a base, that attempts (and can) stay on the base does not aim his feet at a fielder then reach back with his hand to touch the bag in passing.

Frayed Knot wrote: (3) is able and attempts to remain on the base (except home plate) after completion of the slide; -- this is what tripped up Werth but it's also wide open to interpretation. Neither Werth on his previous slide nor Revere earlier in the same game stayed on the base either so then if becomes a matter of whether the ump thinks they were able to if they cared to try. (4) slides within reach of the base without changing his pathway for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder. -- this even more so. Is sliding to a particular side of the base depending on which way the runner thinks the fielder is leaning not allowed? How much of a shift constitutes 'changing his pathway'? Shit, initiating contact was always half the purpose in sliding. Like I said earlier, a lot of this reminds me of the home plate rule when it was first put in. Umps seemed to be calling that one by some strict letter of the law which often bore no resemblance to the intent of the rule or the reasons why it was adopted in the first place. Agreed. These two things are really the new pieces, and with all rules where discretion is involved, it will take time for there to be uniformity on how this rule is interpreted. I don't think this can be helped. It takes time for an acceptable standard to evolve. But to me, if you call it by the letter of the rule, it would be a very simple rule to enforce. Especially with the benefit of slo-mo replay, it's very easy to tell if the target of a slide is the bag, or the fielder standing in the vicinity of the bag. I think it should be enforced strictly. If the second baseman is 3 feet wide of the bag and you aim at him, it's interference. Slide to the bag, stop at the bag.

I think you are missing the gist of the rule. I agree that in nearly every takeout slide there is a possibility that a runner attempts to contact the bag, but is not able to. The rule is stating you cannot have takeout slides any more. (Directed at batmags)

All of your stills are not where the play concluded. Watch the replay here at the 29 second mark. You can see how far past the bag he is when he finishes sliding. http://m.mets.mlb.com/news/article/188640580/mets-turn-critical-double-play-on-interference/ Also no one that is trying to get to second aims their feet three feet wide of the bag.

And I heard yesterday that Dusty Baker complain that there has to be a "common sense" element that if there was no chance at the DP, then interference should not be called. I don't agree with that at all. Whether or not there is any chance at the DP, the runner should not have made an illegal slide. There may have been no chance to get Murphy, but there was every chance that one of Walker's knee tendons could have been torn. Fuck Werth. Fuck Dusty. Fuck Rizzo. And fuck the Nationals.

It's the right move. Get healthy Harvey. Come back strong in 2017 and give a big FU to all the haters from this season.

To put it another way, no runner who is trying to avoid making the last out on a force play at second ever overslides the bag by 4 feet like Werth did. This never happens. He slid feet first, then his momentum carried him so far past the bag that he could not reach back with his back arm to touch second. Jason Werth is over 6 ft tall. With the length of his arm, he can reach back 8 ft. from his feet. He was four feet past the bag, which means that his feet slid 12 feet past the intended target.

All-Time Mets Fauna Lineup 1) Mike Cubbage, 3b 2) Jos� Cardenal, rf 3) Marlon Byrd, cf 4) John Buck, c 5) Barry Lyons, 1b 6) Shawn Hare, lf 7) Rich Puig, 2b 8) David Lamb, ss 9) Craig Swan, sp If you're worried that Swan's rotator cuff still hasn't healed, he has plenty of help in the pen: Paul Byrd, rp Sean Henn, rp Terry Leach, rp Brandon Lyon, rp Jim Mann, rp Robert Person, rp Jason Roach, rap Poor Kevin Bass. Can't even make this team.

well he's out, so no, he walks away. But he has to be able to, which means he has to stop moving. I guess he could pop up and just keep going to the dugout. if you're ABLE to stay on the bag, and you ATTEMPT to stay on the bag, then you're on the bag. Werth was not able to stay on the bag. Why would Werth want to stay on the bag being that he was forced out? Again, I think the rule only requires that Werth make a slide that would allow him to touch the base should he decide to want to touch the base. That is absolutely, positively not what the rule states. RULE 6.01(j) — SLIDING TO BASES ON DOUBLE PLAY ATTEMPTS If a runner does not engage in a bona fide slide, and initiates (or attempts to make) contact with the fielder for the purpose of breaking up a double play, he should be called for interference under this Rule 6.01. A "bona fide slide" for purposes of Rule 6.01 occurs when the runner: (1) begins his slide (i.e., makes contact with the ground) before reaching the base; (2) is able and attempts to reach the base with his hand or foot; (3) is able and attempts to remain on the base (except home plate) after completion of the slide; and (4) slides within reach of the base without changing his pathway for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder. A runner who engages in a "bona fide slide" shall not be called for interference under this Rule 6.01, even in cases where the runner makes contact with the fielder as a consequence of a permissible slide. In addition, interference shall not be called where a runner's contact with the fielder was caused by the fielder being positioned in (or moving into) the runner's legal pathway to the base. Notwithstanding the above, a slide shall not be a "bona fide slide" if a runner engages in a "roll block," or intentionally initiates (or attempts to initiate) contact with the fielder by elevating and kicking his leg above the fielder's knee or throwing his arm or his upper body. If the umpire determines that the runner violated this Rule 6.01(j), the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter-runner out. Note, however, that if the runner has already been put out then the runner on whom the defense was attempting to make a play shall be declared out.

he slid to hit the fielder rather than the base. Had he been sliding for the base, he wouldn't have overslid it. it's only a bona fide slide if (3) is able and attempts to remain on the base (except home plate) after completion of the slide; and it's really simple. DON'T TRY TO HIT THE FIELDER. You may try to get on the bag and if the fielder is there, you can stake your claim, but otherwise DON'T TRY TO HIT THE FIELDER. It's not really a contact sport. I can't believe I'm about to type this, but I agree completely with Ceetar. And to be honest, I don't think there is really all that much to interpret. Here are the key parts: Under the new Rule 6.01(j), a runner will have to make a "bona fide slide," which is defined as making contact with the ground before reaching the base, being able to and attempting to reach the base with a hand or foot, being able to and attempting to remain on the base at the completion of the slide (except at home plate) and not changing his path for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder. That last part is the key. Like Ceetar says, don't try to hit the fielder. On the play above (and really on the earlier one as well), Jason Werth tried to hit the fielder. There is no question about that. If there were 2 outs when that ground ball was hit, there is absolutely no chance that Jason Werth makes that slide. None. And that's why he's out. If you showed the slo-motion replay (the one they had on SNY last night was better) to 100 people who have never seen baseball before, and asked them whether he was trying to get to the white square or whether he was trying to get to the other guy, they'd all answer that he was trying to get to the guy. The way I see it, using the language listed in the rule, Werth did not make a "bona fide" slide for the following reasons: 1. He may or may not have made contact with the ground before reaching the base. It's close. But if it's close, then it's not a bona fide slide. Anyone attempting to reach and stay on the base hits the ground WELL BEFORE reaching the base. 2. He did not attempt to remain on the base at the completion of the slide. That slide was in no way intended to end at the bag. His feet were aimed at Walker. His momentum carried several feet past the bag. Simply reaching back with your hand as an afterthought is not an attempt to stay on the bag. It's as feeble as the guy who reaches for his wallet after the check has been paid and says "Oh I would have paid..." 3. He absolutely, positively changed his path so as to aim his weight and momentum at Walker. No one who is actually trying to get to second base quickly slides that way. A common complaint heard after the game was "Well then I have no idea how we're supposed to break up a double play then." The simple answer is, you're not. You're not allowed to try to break up a double play. You are only allowed to run to second base and try to get there safely. As Ceetar said, this is not a contact sport. No more neighborhood play. No more breaking up the double play. I'm good with that.

I'd been away so yesterday was the first time I got to watch Jose since he's been back. I don't know if anyone else is feeling conflicted, but for me it's a real struggle. I loved Jose as a Met. Well, maybe right up until the last game, but whatever. I wanted to see him re-signed. And when I see him play I want to root for him, and cheer him. I mean, he looks like the guy I loved rooting for. And I thought I'd never see him in a Mets uniform again. But then I remind myself that Jose did very bad things. And sure, I still want him to do well. He's on the Mets. I want them to win. But I don't feel right just welcoming him back. And then I have to temper that with the fact that the charges were dropped and we don't really know what happened. And temper that with the fact that there are a lots of reasons this could be the case and we probably have a pretty good idea of what went down. And so I have to explain to my son why we don't chant the Jose song like we used to. But then I start wondering if I should temper the Bartolo love we have in our house. Sorry, no real point to this post. Just venting a bit that being a fan is not easy.

Well obviously this is not good news at all, but it's good to know that there is a reason (if only partially) for Harvey's struggles this season. The surgery seems like scary stuff, but it's encouraging that some of the recent guys have been able to bounce back successfully. Get the surgery Harv. It's a death sentence if you don't. A few other thoughts: *Good job by the Mets to recognize it, shut it down, and send him to an expert immediately. We rake them when they bungle these injuries. Looks like they were right on top of this one. Maybe having seen it with Dillon Gee before helped them to spot it. *Hard to know what may have led to this, but in reading up on the guys who have had it in the past, you can't help but notice that a few of those guys threw a lot of innings, and went deep into the post-season (Beckett, Carpenter). I can't help but wonder if the innings last year led to this. *The media and fans that blasted Harvey should be embarrassed. Turns out he wasn't struggling because of his demeanor, or his douchiness, or because he got fat. Instead, it's a serious medical condition. Do we know for sure that this has nothing to do with his blood clots in spring training? Suddenly those tabloid headlines don't seem so funny any more do they? I understand that Harvey is unlikeable to a lot of people. He seems super douchy. No question. But he's done nothing but work his ass off and pitch amazing since he's been here. Isn't that worth something? We're going to slam him because he kinda seems like a dick, while adoring a convicted PED user and giving a standing ovation to a guy who is accused of choking his wife? I don't know. Seems awfully hypocritical to me. I don't expect everyone to agree, but in my opinion, the idolization of Bartolo Colon represents the great part of playing in NY. The fans treatment and media treatment of Matt Harvey this year demonstrates the worst.

What he said.

Agreed. Best win of 2016.

Come on Familia.

You were right. Those are better than productive outs. Let's do that more.

Frayed Knot wrote: I hear all this about 'professional ABs' that Gary & Ron are talking about, and I know it might seem a bit picky to complain after tying up a game they once trailed by 6-0, but an actual hit with runners in scoring position might be nice every once in a while. 4 of the 6 runs have scored via outs or should-have-been outs and Flores's Sac Fly was the first time they got a ball out of the infield with RiSP despite having runners all over the place today. There's one.

If it's a tough one then it should be upheld.

Let's go guys. What a huge win this would be.

Very good stuff. I like the Mets.

Nice to get some nice easy wins against the Cubs. We're going to need them. We won't be able to avoid Atlanta forever.

Familia seems like he is a lot better. In fact, better than anyone. I think he's the best we've ever had. In reality he is probably a touch better. Will wait for the FK analysis. Familia seems to have a better assortment of pitches, so he has more options when something is off. Benitez had basically a plus fastball and an ok slider. When he wasn't on, he had to get by on guile.

It's not that he had a bad outing his last time out. It's that he got absolutely pasted by these same guys two days ago. Plus, Gilmartin has never had the traditional lefty splits. Terry Collins labeled the game a "must-win" beforehand, but didn't manage like it once the bell rung. Sure, not scoring at all is THE big problem, and I'm definitely still pissed at Terry for catching TdA on Syndergaard's start, but Terry is doing nothing to increase their chances.

What the fuck was Gilmartin doing in the game? And for what it's worth I said this at home before the inning started. It's a close game. Go with a guy who didn't just get ripped 2 days ago. Another bad game for Terry. Guy should be fired.

And look, batting average isn't everything, and it's not as important as it once was, but it's still something. And the Mets are dead fucking last. You can't be last in hitting and think you can win the World Series.