2015 MLB Season - Let's Play Two!

[Scott Dolan]

Well, and I'm not kidding, my father laid the turf that still exists to this day in the Citrus Bowl. 

He was contracted by the powers that be/were as he was a Superintendent at a local country club at the time. 

Not sure if that counts, but yes, I knew of a groundskeeper at one point. 

It's an artform, no doubt. 

[JSngry]

That cool, man!

For real, I like yard work, I stuff like chalking foul lines and batter's boxes (did it once as a teen-summerjob for the local LL) and you're at the ball bark, like every day pretty much. Come early, stay late.

Don't think that it's a"career", full-time job, more like seasonal employment, maybe, but hey, dragging the dirt every few innings,watering the mound, pulling out the tarp in a bigass hurry, sounds like fun to me.

And I like how you can be part of a team's "secret weapon" strategy, so to speak, that's one more reason why imo turf sucks, it's very non-interpretational. Dudes can interpret the living shit outta some dirt and some grass!

[Brad]

Funny you mention Angel Hernandez. Going back to god knows when, the Mets think he's had it in for them.   Wonder how many other teams think that.  

 

Bob Davidson is another terrible ump.  Why they let him back in is besides me. 

[ejp626]

Some interesting twists, turns, heartbreaks, etc.  It looks like the Blue Jays are done, but I like the Cubs chances of getting to the next round at least.  (I know, I know.  Not supposed to say anything...)

[JSngry]

I need for somebody from Mr. Torre's office to explain whether or not the disallowal of a Mets' appeal at 2nd be/c Utley did not ever touch the base was in accordance with a written rule or whether it was just somebody being interpretational.

Otherwise, Go Mets.

[Brad]

The call on that piece of shit Utley should have been interference and a DP called.  He was there to hurt and this goes back to the Phillies and the Mets.  No love lost there.  Harvey hit Utley earlier this year and Utley tried to hurt Tejada a few years ago.  Swift retribution is needed.  However, I'm guessing both benches will be warned before game 3.  Mets players are angry and there is bad blood now.  

[JSngry]

Thanks for that background, Brad. Not knowing it, I was "ok" with the slide (and I say "ok" in that that kind of stuff used to be expected, but it's a different day now, just...not completely), and barely ok with the replay decision (I mean, it appeared "clear" that Tejada didn't quite hit the bag, but the explanation of why that did not count as a neighborhood play seemed a bit oh REALLY? to me), but look, here's where I really want, need, to hear that this was not interpretational - ok, Utley goes all Ty Cobb and shit, got it, but in so doing he sacrificed the normal baseball logic of a baserunner at least pretending to get to the base and that's a choice with consequences, and how the hell do you not allow for a reckoning of that consequence? You're allowing for every OTHER g.d. consequence of that play to be reckoned, why the fuck not THAT one?

If they got a written rule that they followed, ok. So be it. But if this is just some "judgement" call, then I'm calling bullshit, calling it collect, and not hanging up until Pedro Martinez says so. Torre's gotten all presenatational about accuracy and integrity and all that, we're very pleased to have the great Joe Torre from the comissioner's office with us today, hey Joe, tel us about blahblahblahblahblah, so there had damn well better be a precise written rule here, or else, hey, pooch screwed, JT.

[Brad]

Listening to Torre explain the reasoning was comical and all interpretational.  Torre says he's looking at it to see if it was a dirty slide.  Whst does that mean? Game is over, they lost a SS and the game. 

Edited October 11, 2015 by Brad

[JSngry]

Also, thank to a poster on Lonestar Ball for pointing this out: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/04/sports/baseball/safety-sometimes-prevails-over-accuracy-on-the-first-out-of-a-double-play.html?_r=0

In the 1970s, Hal McRae broke up double plays by hurling himself shoulder first like a linebacker into shortstops and second basemen. As a result, Major League Baseball installed a rule stipulating that runners must slide, making contact with the ground before plowing into an infielder.

Looking at the replay, admittedly not obsessively, but more than once, it is still unclear to me whether or not Utley followed this rule.

It's one thing for the replay to go one way. It's another thing to preemptively disallow the Mets an appeal play, that is some pea-brained shit. At best...

Now, if Terry Collins just took the first explanation he got and didn't push ahead to see what happened, that's his bad. Do we know how that all went down?

Either way, the lack of an appeal play, whether enforced or accepted without pursuit, is unacceptable.

Watching some more, an not seeing even a pretend effort by Utley to touch any kind of dirt before or even while going into Tejada. Rule clearly violated in both spirit and letter.

Fuck The Dodgers. I was already softly leaning that way, have been since Tommy Lasorda, really, but ok, be that way, then.

[JSngry]

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/64132/the-slide-that-ruined-everybodys-night-except-the-dodgers

 

Now, I can even say that Utley's slide did break the rules and that, in fact, not only should he have been called out (Tejada not touching the bag is another issue completely), but the batter should have been called out as well.

Rule 6.05 reads:

A batter is out when --

(m) A preceding runner shall, in the umpire's judgment, intentionally interfere with a fielder who is attempting to catch a thrown ball or to throw a ball in an attempt to complete any play:

Rule 6.05(m) Comment: The objective of this rule is to penalize the offensive team for deliberate, unwarranted, unsportsmanlike action by the runner in leaving the baseline for the obvious purpose of crashing the pivot man on a double play, rather than trying to reach the base. Obviously this is an umpire's judgment play.

Was Utley trying to reach the base? No. Did he leave the baseline? Yes? Was it deliberate, unwarranted and unsportsmanlike? Yes. CALL THE RULE. IT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS.

Or you can use Rule 7.09:

It is interference by a batter or a runner when --

(e) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base 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 runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate. In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner.

Deliberately and willfully? Again, yes. CALL THE RULE. IT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS.

[Scott Dolan]

Utley should really be serving a suspension for game 3. 

And I'm with Brad, I think both dugouts will be issued a warning before the first pitch. 

[Dan Gould]

That was a clusterfark in so many ways it's staggering.

Number one, the NYT article Jim linked states that the neighborhood play is not reviewable. Did something change? WTF were the umpires doing even looking at the question of whether Tejada had his foot on the bag?  And, if the neighborhood 'rule' is still used, how does missing the bag by an inch or less not qualify as 'close enough'?

Ironically if the proper call had been made - interference, out at first, inning over, Utley would have been criticized by Dodger fans for going in that aggressively. The way Tejada was turned around to receive the relay, I don't think he gets the guy at 1st. Might be wrong but it's a tough relay.

But most importantly Utley is the worst douchebag I've ever seen.  I really hope he gets his payback over and over again. The Mets should use him for target practice like the Rays used Brian Daubach of the Red Sox many years ago after he came flying in to the mound to protect Pedro in a game at Tampa.

It won't happen this series but it will happen, and should happen many times. As Alex Cora said, when your knee hits the ground behind the base, it's dirty. I hope the Mets throw at Utley's head many times in the coming season, or someone takes one for the team and comes in at 2B with fists flying and coldcocks him.  Fuck Chase Utley, and I say that as a person who despises the Mets only slightly less than I do the Yankees.

[Scott Dolan]

Endorsing headhunting in retaliation is as immature and ghoulish as it gets. 

I guess if somebody does something I don't care for at work, I should throw a rock at their head. Off the baseball diamond it would be a felony assault charge. 

I still say it should be ON the diamond as well. 

[Brad]

It was like a perfect storm for the Mets: Murphy didn't make a good flip to Tejada, he was in a vulnerable position and Utley, no matter what, is coming in hard   He's a dirty player. However, it couldn't be a double play because Tejada didn't get the one out.  Just a bad situation.

 

The Mets should have retaliated when things got out of hand.   There would have been a brawl but it would have settled matters until putting it off until next week.  

 

Yes, I'm sure there will be a warning.  However, if Utley makes an appearance all bets are off and it could be ugly.  I wouldn't be surprised if Torre suspended him for two games. There will be retaliation of some kind, most likely on the base paths.

 

As bad as the situation was, it was still 2-2 but the Mets bullpen, particularly in the 7th, has been notoriously ineffective this season. Addison Reed was supposed to be the answer but he proved ineffective last night.  In retrospect I suppose he should have brought in Robles but that's a second guess. However, I hope he goes to Robles in the 7th the next time. For sure Robles would have hit someone. He nearly incited a brawl at Philadelphia last week and got himself a three game suspension. 
 

[Scott Dolan]

I hope you're right about the two games. There needs to be a really strong message sent. They let things get out of hand with the Royals and A's earlier in the season, then things snowballed in Chicago because at that time the Royals had simply slipped into "fuck it all" mode. 

They really can't have the kind of situation arise in the playoffs, on a national stage. 

[Dan Gould]

How does anyone justify a suspension for a play ruled "legal" on the field?

[Brad]

If it was late or with an intent to injure. Torre may just decide that he wants to defuse an obvious inflammatory situation and let the teams sort it out when they meet in the regular season, or for whatever team Utley is playing for at the time, assuming he hasn't retired.  I would think the Dodgers wouldn't object too strongly if some sort of suspension took place.  It might be better for all concerned.  

If this had happened in the 1940s, it would have been written off as one of those things. 

[Scott Dolan]

Yeah, and in the NFL you see players fined on a pretty regular basis for plays ruled legal on the field. I don't see why a suspension couldn't work the same way. Especially when the play in question ends with a serious injury. 

[JSngry]

Jon Morosi ‏@jonmorosi 12h12 hours ago

In other words: Replay official is allowed to rule that, had Utley been correctly called safe, he would have been able to touch base.

 

 

[JSngry]

Hypothetical scenario - batter hits home run that is just barely fair, quite iffy. Umps call it an HR on the  field, runner trots around the bases, HR immediately goes into review and the call is upheld.

But wait - the 3B noticed that the batter kinda skipped over the base on his way home - can an appeal play then be made that overturns the decision of HR because ball was fair? Does a replay decision essentially (and officially) "seal" an entire play, or just the element of that play that was challenged?

This was one of my favorite books as a kid, so, believe me, these type of questions need to be asked and answered by citing written rules now that replay is a reality. Because before then, there was a definitive answer for damn near every scenario.

[Neal Pomea]

Utley never touched second base. How could he be safe? Tejada never put out Utley, but Utley also never got to second safely either. To me the play never came to a conclusion. The thing to do was to call Utley out for interference.

[JSngry]

One more question, since I really don't yet know the finer points of the MLB replay protocols...

I'm assuming that the safe call on Utley was based soley on the Dodgers' contesting whether or not Tejada actually touched the base for the force, and the call was made strictly within those parameters.

Apart from the appeal play at second, do the Mets not have a parallel challenge  on the batter being called safe at first in what was a pretty clear case of runner interference? Or is runner interference not a reviewable situation?

[Brad]

On Jim's HR question logic would seem to dictate that since he didn't touch 3rd (provided the appeal is upheld), he is out but is awarded a 2B

On Neal's point, from what I have heard today, once the ump called Utley out he had no obligation to touch 2nd so he was safe on the reversal.  As I understand it, interference would only work on a routine DP where you can use the neighborhood play. As this was far from routine, the neighborhood play couldn't be invoked so interference was out.   

I don't know if this is an alternative but I wonder if Utley could have been called safe at 2nd but Kendrick out at 1st because of Utley's slide.  I don't really know. 

I think it's fortunate that there is a rest day between yesterday's and tomorrow's game as it may afford everybody to think more rationally and focus on playing game 3, not to say that Mets players won't try to take out Kendrick or Seager if given the opportunity.  I like Howie from watching him with the Angels so I hope he doesn't get hurt; even my wife, who watches precious little baseball, knows who he is and likes him.  Other than Kendrick and Turner, the other Dodgers are not really hitting the ball. 

[JSngry]

The interference rules (at least the ones stated above) don't seem to deal with the neighborhood play explicitly, they deal with the runner's intent in trying to break up a double play. The causative action that activates the rules are those of the runner, not of the fielder.

Well, are we to assume then that anything that is not a neighborhood play ceases to be an attempt at a double play? That seems absurd, hell, that IS absurd, but even If so, isn't there a rule against some psycho thugging you just because you're there? I think there might be?

and still, this, because it's relevant here and it will surely be relevant again - is the petition for review one meant to address one single issue, or to review all the elements of the play in its entirety and then make everything right? I would really think it's the former, because on the missed-base thing, nobody's gonna call that for you, you have to ask for it and then see what happens.

And if that is a case - is there not an incumbency for the allowability of a legitimate counter-appeal on the part of, in this case, the Mets, to  address a different element of the play. Yes, the runner should be called safe if the point is that the second-baseman failed to have is foot on the bag, but does it therefore follow that there was also no interference by the runner, and if that indeed does not follow, can we get a review of and decision on that?

Or, like balls and strikes, is runner interference something that does not qualify for a replay challenge? It either is or it isn't, right?

And why does it look like the deeper this goes, the more interpretational it all becomes, and why does it feel like that is exposing some pretty basic logistical/workflow failures/laziness in the way this whole thing was set up? Did they REALLY think that it was going to be just about fair/foul calls, fan interference, and missed/made tags, obvious fuck-ups easily made right? Seriously, talk about "human element", nothing is more human than the desire to make something that didn't go your way the first time do so the second without actually having to do it again.

It's starting to look like MLB's replay system is a can of worms that got opened at the bait shop, not on the lake with hooks at the ready.

[johnblitweiler]

That cool, man!

For real, I like yard work, I stuff like chalking foul lines and batter's boxes (did it once as a teen-summerjob for the local LL) and you're at the ball bark, like every day pretty much. Come early, stay late.

Don't think that it's a"career", full-time job, more like seasonal employment, maybe, but hey, dragging the dirt every few innings,watering the mound, pulling out the tarp in a bigass hurry, sounds like fun to me.

And I like how you can be part of a team's "secret weapon" strategy, so to speak, that's one more reason why imo turf sucks, it's very non-interpretational. Dudes can interpret the living shit outta some dirt and some grass!

You and Jimmy Yancey, the greatest White Sox of them all.