Records are made to be broken, not rules, and certainly not the legs of middle infielders.
Chase Utley was just trying to break up a double play. As it turned out, he not only broke the leg of Mets’ shortstop Ruben Tejada, but also one of baseball’s most ignored rules. Whether or not you believe Utley’s slide was dirty or a good clean baseball play, the MLB rule book says it was illegal. In fact, any slide designed to interfere with a fielder, as opposed to reach a base, is against the rules.
Rule 5.09(a)(13)
Note: Rule 5.09(2)(13) was Rule 6.05(m) in the 2014 version of the Official Baseball Rules.
Source: Official Baseball Rules (mlb.com)
Baseball’s rulebook is rife with ambiguity, but Rule 5.09(a)(13) is actually quite clear. Whenever a runner makes an obvious attempt to crash into the pivot man on the double play, instead of trying to reach the next base, it is a violation of the rules, and both he and the batter are liable to be called out. Unfortunately, second base umpire Chris Guccione didn’t see it that way, but it’s hard not to wonder if his judgment was more clouded by MLB’s tacit acceptance of illegal takeout slides than illuminated by his knowledge of the rules.
That’s not a slide. That’s a tackle.” – Mets outfielder Michael Cuddyer, quoted by MLB.com
Any reasonable person watching last night’s game would conclude that Utley’s sole purpose was to prevent Tejada from making a return throw to first. The 13-year veteran admitted as much in his postgame comments. Besides, the visual evidence is clear. Utley not only began his slide after the bag, but he was perpendicular to the baseline at the point of contact and never made an attempt to touch second base (in fact, his first contact with the base came after returning to the field from the dugout).
So, does that mean runners like Utley should simply concede the double play? Although Rule 5.09(a)(13) prohibits slides with the express intent to interfere with fielders, it doesn’t outlaw those designed to actually reach the base. Baserunners can still breakup double plays by simply sliding hard into second base and preventing the pivot man from moving forward into his throw. When fielders come across the bag, they are entering the runner’s domain and assume responsibility for contact. However, when runners go after the fielder like a heat-seeking missile, they go from trying to break up a double play to breaking the rules. This simple, logical rule of thumb should govern how the play is officiated.
As had occurred with plays at the plate, MLB has ignored its own rules for so long that it may now become time to either more explicitly define what a legal slide is, or, at least, re-educate umpires and players on what the current rulebook allows. In addition, illegal slides should be reviewable. If the replay officials were able to overrule Guccione’s out call, why shouldn’t they be permitted to evaluate his judgment of Utley’s slide? With this second layer of enforcement, major league baseball may be able to more quickly and fairly alter what has become ingrained behavior due to neglect.
The insult to the Mets’ injury occurred when the replay officials, who weren’t able to review the legality of the slide, overturned the out call and placed Utley back at second. Unfortunately, because of how the umpires on the field ruled, that was actually the right decision. Although Utley had never touched second (as we established, that was never his intention), Guccione’s out call removed that requirement. So, when the replay officials decided to overturn the call, they were tasked with determining what would have happened had the incorrect verdict not been rendered. In this case, it was more reasonable to assume that Utley, upon realizing no out signal was made, would have scrambled back to the base ahead of Tejada, who was now on the ground with a broken leg. So, not only was Utley not penalized for his illegal slide, but, he was actually rewarded because of the violent consequences.
The umpires on the field didn’t give the Mets justice, but MLB chief baseball officer Joe Torre’s cryptic comments after the game suggest a measure might be forthcoming from the league’s disciplinary office. Just because Utley may not have intended to break Tejada’s leg, his slide was an example of willful negligence. The veteran, who has a history of violent take outs, had to be aware that his actions had the potential to cause great harm, so, whether or not he viewed his slide as illegal, there should be consequences. A suspension probably won’t make the Mets, or Tejada, feel any better, but it would set a good example and signal MLB’s seriousness about eliminating a needlessly violent part of the game.
Unfortunately for MLB, the NLDS between the Dodgers and Mets has gone from a showcase of great pitching to a discussion of a lack of fairness and potential retaliation. Equally unfortunate is Chase Utley’s career could now become defined more by one dirty play than 13 years of skillful performance. Such is the price for not playing by the rules.
Oh, are we playing by grammar school playground rules? Everyone involved in baseball seems not to have a problem with the slide except Dodgers haters and desciples of the Posey Rule (see any mis-plays at the plate this year?). Where have you gone Pete Rose / Bud Harrelson? Oh well, wild-card berths to everyone and no losses for pitchers – just mistakes. And strange, a problem with breaking rules on a Yankees-friendly blog. ‘member the hippy Reggie Jackson?
William, tell us where your allegiance is? That ‘slide’ by Utley was more like a cross block that would be illegal and penalized in football, a game where players wear protective equipment. It is indefensible when the player is lying on the ground with a broken leg! It doesn’t matter what Utley claims his intent was (to break up the double play). If by doing so, you endanger someone’s career, you should pay a price. I’d say a three game suspension is in order, although he should have been called out and I would go so far as to enforce the ultimate penalty of that rule – that the batter should have been called out, as well. The Dodgers would not have tied the game that inning, lets alone go on to win the game. If there is a baseball God, the Dodgers are doomed to defeat once again!
Otto, is it more defensible if the player was lying on the ground without a broken leg? Is it more defensible if the runner slides straight in and snaps the fielder’s ankle? Is it defensible if the pitcher, in order to back the batter off the plate, pitches inside and accidently hits the batter in the side of the head or the face. All had legitimate intent, which if he was our runner / pitcher, was good baseball strategy. While not football, baseball can be a dangerous game. I don’t know your team but if you check its history, you’ll probably find a few similar instances I mention above.
The fact remains that by Utley’s own statements, he broke the rule. You are right that baseball is a dangerous game. Injuries can still be experienced when not breaking this rule. However, it is black and white; Utley broke the rule.
You’re high – Utley didn’t admit to breaking any rule – because he didn’t.
BTW Maybe the mets need to recall what Murphy did to Rollins in regular season – scroll to bottom to see the image where Murphy isn’t even facing 2nd base. Only difference: No injury… Likely because Rollins didn’t try to spin to make the throw.
http://www.sonsofstevegarvey.com/2015/10/on-chase-utley-and-hard-nosed-double.html
is the baseline defined in the rule book as anything other than lane 3′ from where the runner is & the next base? If not, this rule clearly would not apply as Utley never left that lane.
My alligence is with the Giants since that info has been required.
You are quoting a very outdated definition of the rule. The whole ‘baseline’ thing was applicable in the 70s and 80s but is absolutely not part of the rule for at least the last two years. Currently, the runner owns the base itself, but still cannot slide cleats up into the though of the pivot man.
Go read the rule book. The baseline is defined there. Utley didn’t leave it. That is the only restriction placed upon him once the ball is fielded.
“Very outdated”; “for at least 2 years”. So your perspective is that of an 11 year old.
The irony to me is that Tejada’s jumping while making a 270* pirouette. If I’m a Dodger, I *want* that throw made.
the location of the baseline, and past history of rough play at second is all irrelevant. There are rules specifically about “unsportsmanlike conduct”. I’d say Utely did not interfere with the throw or catch, but why would any sane baseball fan want a runner to be allowed to undertake any kind of rolling tackle, body slam or other perverted type of “slide” to break up a double play. In years past, a runner would slide into the bag, and hope that the fielder would take a tumble over the sliding runner to upset the throw to first. And now “baseball purists” want to allow ramming the fielder to be read into the rules? I think that they have to refine the home plate collision rules to allow the catcher more room, but they also have to start calling runner interference when the batter going to first base does not go to the outside lane to give room for a throw to 1st .And Utley did admit to wanting to break up the double play…. but should he be allowed to do that after going past thye base??
Unsportsmanlike conduct rule is 6.04, Fred. Go read it. Very specific & nothing remotely close to this situation.
D at Heart: Baseball rules have the “comment” section to clarify intent of the rule and to give future direction and interpretation. Golf rules have “decisions” that are used as precedent for future interpretations. You may not think that “unsportsmanlike conduct” applies here. You are entitled to that opinion. We’ll see what happens at the hearing, and if the Players’ Association stands up for Utley.
None of Utley’s body touched the ground, or the “1st to 2nd baseline” until his butt was even with the bag. What was he “sliding” into then…3rd??
The baseline is not between bases, Fred. It’s defined by the runner. And it becomes defined only when a tag is attempted. Ergo, Utley never left it. Given all that I don’t see how the comment’s qualification that a runner leave the base path to interfere applies in this instance.
If you’ll go freeze frame the contact, I think you’ll see that Tejada’s foot is off the bag’s back corner toward RF by about 18″ and that Utley’s left arm is above the bag. All of that seems to say that Utley’s still in the baseline at that moment.
So the discussion of legal sliding and take outs here so far is limited to the football fans wanting to continue the offensive players audition for the WWF! So let’s go to the realities of the play and rules. His slide was not a slide. He went in LATE, ON HIS KNEES UPWARD (for a full body tackle…not a disruption of the double play) and regardless of the umpire call showed his intention to just break up the play and concede the base as he saw Tejada a;ready beat him to the bag. MLB has acknowledged this by even quoting rule 5.09 (the illegal interference of a runner on a defensive play ) particularly this one in their reason for Utley’s suspension.
As such if you even want to get into the joke of calling Tejada’s missing the bag by centimeters (where during the regular season farther distances were grated outs) the batter runner should have been OUT! MLB as usual giving contradictory, self serving rulings by which further evidence in this play showed a MAJOR screw up…. no matter who your allegiance is to in a very important game. Replay is not to protect the umpires!!! Certainly didn’t this time.
If the runner is only allowed to go to bag, it seems only fair that the fielder must actually touch the bag while in control of the ball. Make the runner go to the bag, but eliminate the “neighborhood” play.\
Oh, I’m an Angel fan/Dodger hater who wonders why Mike Napoli of the Rangers wasn’t suspended after making Johnny Giavotella look like a rag doll in the path of a truck a week or so ago. That slide was much farther from the bag than Utley’s
Everybody except me seems to have read the rules and the comments. So I did. It seems everybody didn’t finish the paragraph. And I quote “Obviously this is an umpire’s judgment call.”
So, a play unfolds before an umpire’s eyes and, in his judgment, there is nothing illegal.
Two thoughts. First, the umpire is not perfect so he must be disciplined, berated and fired. Second, before we post wins and losses in the standing, why don’t a panel of experts review the entire game and approve the outcome.
A third thought – if Harvey shows up on time to pitch with the intention on “protecting his teammates” and he does hit a batter, will he be persecuted for premeditated assault with a deadly.
The “neighborhood play” was a gross perversion of the rules, as baseball has slowly let the umpires, players and MLB leadership look the other way as regards the rules. The rules are arcane and difficult to understand and follow often times. But the slowly evolving aggression at 2nd base stands out more than anything. The neighborhood play evolved as the evolution of aggressive sliding tactics escalated. The fielder should have to make the tag on the base for a force out, but the runner should be required to adhere to the intent of the rules regarding the double play at 2nd. There are too many things wrong with the play allowed at 2nd, and the umps, players and MLB are all part of the problem.
d/Hearts: That is the baseline rule as you said. So if the runner takes out the fielder that is not interfering with the runner while the fielder is trying to continue his play, even if the runner is in the baseline past 2nd, is the runner causing interference to reach out with his body to interupt the fielder? There are too many things wrong with the “neighborhood play”, starting with the umpires perverting the applicable rules over a long period of time. MLB is becoming the new NFL for creating rules as they go along.