413 replies to this topic

[mweb08]

I couldn't find DJ's link, probably because I didn't look for it.  This?

 

 

This has been in the rule book for ages and isn't interpreted the way you'd like.

 

There is another rule that goes along with this as well. It is not typically interpreted the way it is written, but anyone who says it's not in the rule book is flat out wrong. 

 

They need to stop saying the rule needs to be changed, rather they should say the current rules needs to be enforced. And there was nothing typical about this Utley play, This play was also so far outside the norm that I have to assume that anyone referencing  typical plays where players try to break up double plays is just being intellectually dishonest. 

[Russ]

This is the one that's similar.

 

If, in the judgment of the umpire, a batter-runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball, with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead; the umpire shall call the batter-runner out for interference and shall call out the runner who had advanced closest to the home plate regardless where the double play might have been possible. In no event shall bases be run because of such interference;

[Russ]

The one about a runner being out already.

 

Any batter or runner who has just been put out, or any runner who has just scored, hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate;

[bnickle]

It clearly wasn't illegal. He was only suspended because Tejada got seriously hurt. There are similar plays all the time. 

[bnickle]

There is another rule that goes along with this as well. It is not typically interpreted the way it is written, but anyone who says it's not in the rule book is flat out wrong. 

 

They need to stop saying the rule needs to be changed, rather they should say the current rules needs to be enforced. And there was nothing typical about this Utley play, This play was also so far outside the norm that I have to assume that anyone referencing  typical plays where players try to break up double plays is just being intellectually dishonest. 

It was absolutely typical.  The only thing that wasn't typical was the severity of the injury. 

[mweb08]

It clearly wasn't illegal. He was only suspended because Tejada got seriously hurt. There are similar plays all the time. 

Prove it. I can't recall any plays that bad.

[bnickle]

 A player going in hard to break up a DP within reach of the bag happens every night. Your judgement of how dirty it was is just your interpretation of an unwritten rule. 

[DJ MC]

Prove it. I can't recall any plays that bad.

 

 

Of course, this is a strawman argument you're fighting against. Anyone who says that kind of play is OK is doing baseball a disservice.

[mweb08]

 A player going in hard to break up a DP within reach of the bag happens every night. Your judgement of how dirty it was is just your interpretation of an unwritten rule. 

Such fucking bullshit man. Seriously, never use the you know baseball better because you've played it card ever again. You know that wasn't a play that happens every night. Everyone that watches baseball knows that. Stop bullshitting us.

[bnickle]

Such fucking bullshit man. Seriously, never use the you know baseball better because you've played it card ever again. You know that wasn't a play that happens every night. Everyone that watches baseball knows that. Stop bullshitting us.

Calm down. Its not BS. I stand by what I said, he went in hard within reach of the bag. That's not illegal. If you want to go talk about the ambiguous part of it, I've already said its something Utley probably regrets. He was a step late getting down and ended up really bad. A play where Im mad if Im a Met, but one where Im giving Utley a high 5 as a Dodger because he did something within the rules to help his team.  If that makes me a hypocrite whatever, but that's baseball.  I go back to real time. I didnt think it was obviously dirty when I watched it live. Neither did the 2b ump or any other ump. To make this out to be cut and dry is just wrong, and it's only happening because of the injury. 

[DJ MC]

Neither did the 2b ump or any other ump.

 

This isn't necessarily true, though.

 

What they ruled seems to be that because Utley was not out--Tejada didn't touch the base--the particular interference rules did not apply. Just because they didn't make a judgement on the cleanliness of the actual slide doesn't mean that they felt either way, or that MLB wasn't right to make their own.

[bnickle]

This isn't necessarily true, though.

What they ruled seems to be that because Utley was not out--Tejada didn't touch the base--the particular interference rules did not apply. Just because they didn't make a judgement on the cleanliness of the actual slide doesn't mean that they felt either way, or that MLB wasn't right to make their own.

I disagree that ws the interpretation. Especially, in real time.

[RShack]

 

Of course, this is a strawman argument you're fighting against. Anyone who says that kind of play is OK is doing baseball a disservice.

 

That was horrible sliding technique... he was in great position to do it right, but he fucked it up... if this was medicine, he'd get sued for sliding malpractice...

 

If we assume no hostile intent, it looks to me like he just doesn't know how to slide right... it was the opposite of skilled....

[RShack]

In the end, that's why Utley was suspended: to show that whether or not his actions were officially against the rules, and whether or not the umpires got the calls on the play correct or incorrect, that style of play won't be tolerated.

 

Well, it's not "in the end" yet, now is it?   Let's see how his appeal turns out...

 

Did you hear them say the suspension was tied to a rule?  I didn't.  Did I just miss that part?  Until I hear what rule it's about, I still think it was Torre caving to having mic's in his face... now, events might prove me wrong, they might point to a rule... but it's no rule that I ever heard of... and no rule I can find either... and no rule that's ever been invoked, ever...

[RShack]

There is another rule that goes along with this as well. It is not typically interpreted the way it is written, but anyone who says it's not in the rule book is flat out wrong. 

 

They need to stop saying the rule needs to be changed, rather they should say the current rules needs to be enforced. And there was nothing typical about this Utley play, This play was also so far outside the norm that I have to assume that anyone referencing  typical plays where players try to break up double plays is just being intellectually dishonest. 

 

Look, baseball rules aren't a huge tome... as rules go, they're short...  plus, whatever this Mystery Rule is that you keep invoking, it's gotta be a section of Rule 7... so, howsabout if you go find it before you try to invoke it again....  until you can show otherwise, I say it doesn't exist... because I've looked... I've looked before this play happened, and I looked again (twice) since it happened... so, why don't you put the rule book where you unsupported claims are?

[RShack]

This isn't necessarily true, though.

 

What they ruled seems to be that because Utley was not out--Tejada didn't touch the base--the particular interference rules did not apply. Just because they didn't make a judgement on the cleanliness of the actual slide doesn't mean that they felt either way, or that MLB wasn't right to make their own.

 

But the ump *did* call him out and did *not* call interference... it took video replay to overturn the out call because Tejada's foot missed the bag by an inch... which I thought was bullshit, they should have said he was out on a neighborhood play, and then it couldn't be appealed... they said it wasn't a neighborhood play because Tejada was facing the wrong way and therefore didn't know he was at risk... which seems crazy to me... but at no time did they call Utley for interference, even when he was out... neither did Cal or Darling or Whathisname even mention that... the discussion of that didn't start until way after everybody knew Tejada got his leg broken and Joe had some reporter in his face with a mic...  

 

Personally, I think it was Joe's mealy-mouthed response to that first guy that helped get it all ramped up... 

[RShack]

Re: the Mystery Rule that supposedly says Utley broke it... what do we imagine such a rule might possibly say?   Remember, rules have to be actually enforceable... they can't just say "baserunners have to be nice"... so, what possible wording might exist somewhere in the rule book that would make what he did illegal?   I'm sure that whoever hears Utley's appeal will want to know...

[SportsGuy]

No I'm definitely judging him in that moment. It's beyond retarded to think he wasn't showing up the other team.

Lol

[SportsGuy]

Lol...I love the hypocrisy in this thread. It's truly hilarious and ironic.

[bnickle]

Lol...I love the hypocrisy in this thread. It's truly hilarious and ironic.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.