Master Index of Archived Threads


It was a double fucking play

Centerfield Oct 11 2015 12:16 AM

From David Schoenfeld's article on ESPN: http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/ ... he-dodgers 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.

El Segundo Escupidor Oct 11 2015 04:34 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Hi I'm Doug Glanville, I played for the Phillies and I'm a twat. I became a twat when I played on a team full of twats. I get paid for being a twat. This makes me the luckiest twat in the world. http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/ ... ball-world

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 11 2015 06:02 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Centerfield Oct 11 2015 06:08 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

I don't know who that is between Wright and Utley, but he has a close up look at David's giant balls. Go David. I slept like crap. I can't remember ever being more mad about something that happened in baseball. Heartbroken, sure. Even sad. But as mad as I get watching the game it never takes me more than a few minutes to calm down. 8 hours later and I'm still fuming. That play was wrong on so many levels. It should have been a DP and Utley should have been fucking ejected with a suspension following today.

El Segundo Escupidor Oct 11 2015 06:47 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: "I'll show you Norfolk, VA, right here, motherfucker." Centerfield wrote: I don't know who that is between Wright and Utley, but he has a close up look at David's giant balls. Go David. I slept like crap. I can't remember ever being more mad about something that happened in baseball. Heartbroken, sure. Even sad. But as mad as I get watching the game it never takes me more than a few minutes to calm down. 8 hours later and I'm still fuming. That play was wrong on so many levels. It should have been a DP and Utley should have been fucking ejected with a suspension following today. For me, this is second worst playoff loss that hasn't involved elimination behind Game 1 of the 2000 World Series.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 11 2015 07:34 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Utley's slide was way over the top but that was the kind of play we called "a hospital play" in frisbee. Even a "clean" slide might have injured Tejada with his back turned and twisting blindly like that. You wonder if Muffy feels some remorse. To me the crime was what happened after the play. Wrong on every level.

Centerfield Oct 11 2015 07:38 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Author is garbage and always will be. I'm pissed at the gutless umps, both on the field and in NY, who didn't have the balls to call interference. Utley admitted his goal was to out a body on Tejada. This is why he ran right past the bag. That is, by rule, interference.

cooby Oct 11 2015 08:39 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

https://www.change.org/p/major-league-b ... responsive

d'Kong76 Oct 11 2015 08:53 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Now that the smoke has cleared and everyone has chimed in I really don't see how MLB cannot discipline Mr. Utley. If they don't, it's just another chunk of bat shard disguised as a ball being swept under rug and MLB can go fuck itself.

Ashie62 Oct 11 2015 09:16 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

I am guessing Utley gets fined at that's it.

Frayed Knot Oct 11 2015 09:20 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Meanwhile, five years plus 17 days ago

d'Kong76 Oct 11 2015 09:46 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Ashie62 wrote: I am guessing Utley gets fined at that's it. I don't care what the discipline is, just don't want it swept under the rug. I'm not anti-roughhousing in baseball by any stretch. But if you're going to be a dick about it, you should pay for it somehow.

Valadius Oct 11 2015 10:01 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Centerfield wrote: I don't know who that is between Wright and Utley, but he has a close up look at David's giant balls. Go David. I slept like crap. I can't remember ever being more mad about something that happened in baseball. Heartbroken, sure. Even sad. But as mad as I get watching the game it never takes me more than a few minutes to calm down. 8 hours later and I'm still fuming. That play was wrong on so many levels. It should have been a DP and Utley should have been fucking ejected with a suspension following today. Right there with you. I probably finally fell asleep at 3. I've never been this angry about a play in my life.

Edgy MD Oct 11 2015 02:35 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

There's also the problematic execution. It seems that Colon working the guy away and he pulls one to the left of the bag, Tejada should have been the one in position to make the play. Good job by Murphy getting to it, but he deletes that by feeding a shovel throw when he's too far away from the bag to lead Tejada with a shovel throw. Tejada is forced to reach behind him to take the feed, making the double-play impossible (though he seemed to be hoping to execute some sort of mad pirouette), and exposing his blind side, leading to disaster.

Edgy MD Oct 11 2015 03:27 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

[fimg=600:255faqby]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/screen-shot-2015-10-11-at-5-21-57-pm.png[/fimg:255faqby]

d'Kong76 Oct 11 2015 03:57 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Utley: I thought his leg was the base. Torre: Oh ok, that sounds reasonable.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 11 2015 05:18 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

I had to work brunch early this AM, and I didn't fall asleep until after 2, and that was after another bourbon. It should probably be comforting that virtually every neutral observer seems similarly disgusted, each to varying degree. But frankly, the near-universal sympathy almost makes it worse, in a way... it underscores the egregiousness of it all.

Frayed Knot Oct 11 2015 05:29 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: But frankly, the near-universal sympathy almost makes it worse, in a way... it underscores the egregiousness of it all. Right! Like if the fry-chef, the check-out girl, and the priest all knew it was fucked up, why didn't six umpires?

Benjamin Grimm Oct 11 2015 06:03 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Not to mention the butcher, the baker, and the people on the streets.

Edgy MD Oct 11 2015 06:14 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

But strangely, not the Hall of Fame Iron Man shortstop with a national youth baseball league named after him.

metsmarathon Oct 11 2015 07:21 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Utley was just suspended 2 games for his illegal slide. Which will probably ensure that utley'sconcussion lifespan exceeds 2 more days. Say, if the slide was illegal... How the ever living fuck was he safe!?

d'Kong76 Oct 11 2015 07:33 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Not to mention the butcher, the baker, and the people on the streets. Where do they go? To meet the Mets!!! Two game suspension is a little severe, but the powers that be got a lot of media heat today.

Frayed Knot Oct 11 2015 07:34 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

metsmarathon wrote: Utley was just suspended 2 games for his illegal slide. Conveniently the length of the remainder of the Dodgers' season.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 11 2015 07:37 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

d'Kong76 wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: Not to mention the butcher, the baker, and the people on the streets. Where do they go? To meet the Mets!!! Two game suspension is a little severe, but the powers that be got a lot of media heat today. It's nothing. They fucked the play up so badly it ruined the whole series. Utley isn;t the only one who ought to be paying a price.

Frayed Knot Oct 11 2015 07:39 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

“After thoroughly reviewing the play from all conceivable angles, I have concluded that Mr. Utley’s action warrants discipline,” Joe Torre said. “While I sincerely believe that Mr. Utley had no intention of injuring Ruben Tejada, and was attempting to help his Club in a critical situation, I believe his slide was in violation of Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(13), which is designed to protect fielders from precisely this type of rolling block that occurs away from the base.” Utley, however, can appeal the suspension. If he appeals, the release says, the discipline will be postponed until the “process is complete.” So Joe, had the short-stop's name been 'Jeter' how many months would he have been suspended?

d'Kong76 Oct 11 2015 07:40 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

I'm trying to be postive, let's take these two home games and run with them and advance NOW!!!

Centerfield Oct 11 2015 07:40 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Now suspend the umpire and the replay crew for not having the balls to make the right call. Fuck them.

Fman99 Oct 11 2015 07:47 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

During the Jays game they've announced Utley is going to appeal the suspension. Well, of course he is.

Mets – Willets Point Oct 11 2015 07:51 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Fman99 wrote: During the Jays game they've announced Utley is going to appeal the suspension. Well, of course he is. MLB is going to be like "Dumbass, the only reason we're doing this is to protect you. Enjoy your paid vacation."

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 11 2015 10:45 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Utley was just suspended 2 games for his illegal slide. Which will probably ensure that utley'sconcussion lifespan exceeds 2 more days. Say, if the slide was illegal... How the ever living fuck was he safe!? CORRECTION: How wasn't it a double play, then? Again, what should be a balm, feeling like a backhanded slap in the figurative balls. Centerfield wrote: Now suspend the umpire and the replay crew for not having the balls to make the right call. Fuck them. No, just award the DP, and retroactively give the Mets the win. That's the way it would have played out, had you made the right call, no, blue?

batmagadanleadoff Oct 11 2015 11:47 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Utley was just suspended 2 games for his illegal slide. Which will probably ensure that utley'sconcussion lifespan exceeds 2 more days. Say, if the slide was illegal... How the ever living fuck was he safe!? CORRECTION: How wasn't it a double play, then? Again, what should be a balm, feeling like a backhanded slap in the figurative balls. Centerfield wrote: Now suspend the umpire and the replay crew for not having the balls to make the right call. Fuck them. No, just award the DP, and retroactively give the Mets the win. That's the way it would have played out, had you made the right call, no, blue? I know whatcha mean. For that win, the Dodgers'll gladly pay the price of Utley's two game suspenspion every single time. You'll never get the Dodgers to say this publicly but inside their private world, they're probably treating Utley as if he'd hit five grand slam homers in this NLDS.

A Boy Named Seo Oct 12 2015 01:06 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Utley was just suspended 2 games for his illegal slide. Which will probably ensure that utley'sconcussion lifespan exceeds 2 more days. Say, if the slide was illegal... How the ever living fuck was he safe!? CORRECTION: How wasn't it a double play, then? Again, what should be a balm, feeling like a backhanded slap in the figurative balls. Centerfield wrote: Now suspend the umpire and the replay crew for not having the balls to make the right call. Fuck them. No, just award the DP, and retroactively give the Mets the win. That's the way it would have played out, had you made the right call, no, blue? I know whatcha mean. For that win, the Dodgers'll gladly pay the price of Utley's two game suspenspion every single time. You'll never get the Dodgers to say this publicly but inside their private world, they're probably treating Utley as if he'd hit five grand slam homers in this NLDS. They're not even doing it privately.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 05:57 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

metsmarathon wrote: Utley was just suspended 2 games for his illegal slide. Which will probably ensure that utley'sconcussion lifespan exceeds 2 more days. Say, if the slide was illegal... How the ever living fuck was he safe!? Which, of course, makes it, once again, eerily similar to the Clemens violation. If his transgression was worthy of discipline after the game, how was it considered kosher during the game? I tend to feel like, going back at least 20 years, 80% of the appealed suspensions in MLB are resolved by the player getting his suspension cut in half in exchange for dropping the appeal. I imagine that will happen this time.

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2015 06:16 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Edgy MD wrote: Which, of course, makes it, once again, eerily similar to the Clemens violation. If his transgression was worthy of discipline after the game, how was it considered kosher during the game? Was Clemens ever disciplined? Anyway, the 'How can it be' part is because it's the umps' judgement ruling in the first case and then the league deciding on something else after the fact. What they're saying, despite not specifically saying it, is that the umps royally screwed up their call. I tend to feel like, going back at least 20 years, 80% of the appealed suspensions in MLB are resolved by the player getting his suspension cut in half in exchange for dropping the appeal. I imagine that will happen this time. Not sure that that large a percentage get reduced. Besides, I think at least half the purpose of the suspension -- and specifically its length -- is to keep Utley off of CitiField. We shirley don't KNOW what would have happened had the home games been reversed and the next two were due to be played in LA, but I know a lot of people are thinking that way. This is also not, I'm sure some of you will recall, the first time a Dodger has been suspended during a post-season game vs the Mets. Reliever Jay Howell was ejected and later suspended mid-AB when the umps caught him with a (slightly) smaller version of the La Brea tar pit on his glove. His suspension, IIRC, was reduced upon appeal but that was more based on his argument that a missed post-season game carries more weight than missing one in the regular season. The league (Uberroth?) bought that logic and reduced his sentence from 3 games down to 2 (or maybe it was 2 to 1) but it was definitely not a case where the suspension was pre-reduced in a plea arrangement kind of thing. As far as I can remember, no Dodger was blatantly cheating during the 2006 NLDS - or maybe some were but the Mets were too busy rolling over them to bother complaining about it.

Fman99 Oct 12 2015 06:50 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

I think, honestly, that the suspension is a cover up to keep him off of the field and out of the stadium in NY. Which means I also believe the 2 games will hold up on appeal.

seawolf17 Oct 12 2015 07:09 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Fman99 wrote: I think, honestly, that the suspension is a cover up to keep him off of the field and out of the stadium in NY. Which means I also believe the 2 games will hold up on appeal. This. I honestly think they tell him to fly back to LA and wait for a potential Game 5. I have little issue with the broken leg -- injuries happen. But the fact that they came back and didn't call it interference is bullshit.

bmfc1 Oct 12 2015 07:14 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

It comes across as keeping Utley away from Mets fans as it is only for two games. Why 2 and not the rest of the series or even the playoffs (not that LA is going past this series)? Frankly, this is a good deal for LA: they lose a bench player for 2 games but (likely) won a game because of an illegal maneuver and took away the Mets starting SS.

themetfairy Oct 12 2015 07:17 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Did Terry appeal the lack of an interference call on Saturday? If not, why not?

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 07:18 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

I don't know if "they" is the league or the Dodgers, but I don't think it's about keeping him out of New York. Frayed Knot wrote: Which, of course, makes it, once again, eerily similar to the Clemens violation. If his transgression was worthy of discipline after the game, how was it considered kosher during the game? Was Clemens ever disciplined? Yes. He got a fine that was higher than guys tend to get when they are actually ejected, which only underscored the miscarriage. Frayed Knot wrote: Anyway, the 'How can it be' part is because it's the umps' judgement ruling in the first case and then the league deciding on something else after the fact. What they're saying, despite not specifically saying it, is that the umps royally screwed up their call. Sure, but unlike 2000, now there's a mechanism for the league over-ruling umps on the field.

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2015 07:34 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Edgy MD wrote: Sure, but unlike 2000, now there's a mechanism for the league over-ruling umps on the field. You mean the replay provision? Well sure, but that's not the league judging the umps, it umps ruling on umps and even then only on the specifics of the challenge; namely: Did Ruben's toe touch the base? Torre's job is to be after the fact discipline czar, there's no way he's going to re-call plays on the field.

Ceetar Oct 12 2015 08:11 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Frayed Knot wrote: Sure, but unlike 2000, now there's a mechanism for the league over-ruling umps on the field. You mean the replay provision? Well sure, but that's not the league judging the umps, it umps ruling on umps and even then only on the specifics of the challenge; namely: Did Ruben's toe touch the base? Torre's job is to be after the fact discipline czar, there's no way he's going to re-call plays on the field. technically what was reviewed was whether the throw pulled him off the bag. You have to phrase it correctly or it becomes the 'neighborhood' play and you can't review it.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 08:14 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

He doesn't have to. Terry could and should have called for a replay review with regard to the slide.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 12 2015 08:17 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

http://m.mlb.com/video/v34382155/atlnym ... 9th-inning Remember this one?

Centerfield Oct 12 2015 08:37 AM Re: It was a double fucking play Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 12 2015 09:04 AM

Ok. I've had some time to calm down now (it took all day Sunday. Like the entire day. I have never been that mad for so long about anything Mets-related). And since I've calmed down, I've thought about whether my reaction was warranted. As all of this was going down, my immediate reactions were: 1) Mets got blatantly screwed multiple times by the umps. They should walk off the field right now in protest. 2) Utley is a dirty fuckhead and we should hunt him down and kick the shit out of him. 3) Terry Collins should be fired. But at the time I was very emotional, a little buzzed, and not in the right state of mind to be making any real decisions. But now, calm and sober, I think my reactions may have been a bit severe, but they were dead on point. I'll break this up into three separate posts because it's long. Mets Got Screwed By the Umps. And the Screwup was One for the Ages. It wasn't just that the Mets got screwed by a bad call. They got screwed by a bad call, and then a series of bad judgment calls, all resulting in the worst possible result for the Mets. First and foremost, the play should have been ruled interference. Section (a)(13) states: (A batter is out when) 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. The explanation follow rule 5.09(a)(13) from official MLB rulebook. 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. There is not a person in the world that can watch this replay and reach any other conclusion. You could travel to Nepal, pull indigenous people off a mountain, show them the replay and ask whether the runner is trying to go for the base, or the player, and every single one of them will say he was going for the player. You cannot reach any other conclusion when a man runs past a base, and delivers the force of his entire running start into the lower half of an opposing player. Double play awarded. Inning over. Kudos to MLB for watching the replay and acknowledging that this is what should have happened. But wait, there's more. Tejada was ruled not to touch the bag on replay review. But that replay should never have taken place. MLB and the umpires state that because Murphy's throw was off-line, it was not subject to the neighborhood play. Absolutely not true. Here is the rule: Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following calls will not be subject to review: The Umpire's judgment that a runner is clearly out on a force play at second base under circumstances in which the defensive player may or may not have touched second base in his attempt to complete a double play and avoid a collision with the runner. All other elements of the call shall be subject to review, including whether the fielder caught the ball, had control of the ball, was drawn off the bag, or tagged the runner. In this regard, a determination as to whether the fielder made a catch before dropping the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch shall be reviewable. There is no question that this is what took place here. Tejada missed second because, and only because, he was attempting to complete a double play. If there were two outs in the inning, Tejada catches the ball, looks down and sits on second base. He does not attempt to whirl around and direct his eyes toward first. Was it a tough play? Yes, but it was only a tough play because Tejada was trying to turn two. Whether or not the rule applies is not the difficulty of the play. It's the intent of fielder. And here, the fielder is trying to protect himself while trying to turn two. It is not correct that Murphy's throw pulled him off the bag. Again, if there were two outs, staying on second is a routine play. Murphy did not pull Tejada off the bag. His throw failed to properly lead Tejada to make the double play easier. These are completely different things. It makes all the sense in the world that the intent of the fielder should dictate here. If a player is thinking "OMG, this throw is pulling me off the bag", he should stretch and stay on the bag. If he is thinking "How do I get this throw off to first", then the neighborhood play should apply. You can't ask middle infielders to determine whether this is a routine double play or not while making these plays. There is either a neighborhood play or there isn't. Enforce the rule. Allowing this play to go to reviewed was a blatant misreading of the rule. I think they should file a protest for this. MLB's reasoning is off base. And these two, are just warmups for the biggest fuck up of them all. There is no fucking way in hell that Chase Utley should have been awarded second base. MLB's explanation is that Utley is awarded second base because the call on the field was wrong, and he is therefore given the base. This is not true. This is what the rule states: Correcting an Incorrect Call Consistent with Official Baseball Rule 8.02(c) (formerly Rule 9.02(c)), 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 explanation had been that Utley didn't touch the base because he was called out. That is why he left the field. What they failed to consider is that Ruben Tejada never thought tag Utley because the call had been out. If immediately following the collision, the call had been safe, Utley would have presumably, tried to scramble back to the bag, and Tejada would have tried to tag him. It was within the replay official's discretion to determine what may have happened in this scenario. Let me repeat this. Awarding Utley second base was within the replay official's discretion. And that is the part that bogges my mind. The replay official, having the benefit of time, super-slo mo replays, and a rule book at his fingertips, saw the following things: 1. The tackle that would later warrant a suspension 2. Utley run right past the bag and aim at Tejada's leg 3. Tejada dancing around second WHILE TRYING TO TURN A DOUBLE PLAY 4. Tejada carted off on a stretcher 5. A millimeter between Tejada's foot and the base 6. A baserunner who, after completely ignoring the base on the way in, ignored it on the way off the field 7. A fielder lying there with a broken leg as a result of the tackle referenced in #1 And then, having the discretion to award the base or not, made the conscious decision to give Utley the base. It took an out off the board, and the Dodgers scored all of their runs with two outs. It is inexcusable that this replay official should not have to answer for his decision here. They were screwed THREE TIMES in one play. Oh, and they lost their shortstop to a broken leg. HOW THE FUCK IS THIS DEFENSIBLE. Every umpire involved in these three decisions should be suspended. They should never work the post-season again.

Centerfield Oct 12 2015 08:41 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Thought #2: Chase Utley is a Dirty Player. Should be Suspended Well the suspension happened. Kudos to Joe Torre and MLB to have the balls to take a stand, even if it means admitting that the umpires fucked up Saturday night. Utley has had a history of this kind of bullshit. The earlier takeout slide on Tejada in 2010. This slide that someone posted in the IGT: Nothing will ever make me feel better about what happened. But if a new rule is invoked and it goes down in history as "The Utley Rule" and he is forever known to future generations as the dickless coward that he is, then I will take some consolation in this.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 12 2015 08:43 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

I got a question: What's a "dirty play"? Is every illegal play necessarily dirty?

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 08:44 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

First and foremost, the play should have been ruled interference. Section (a)(13) states: (A batter is out when) 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. The explanation follow rule 5.09(a)(13) from official MLB rulebook. 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. There is not a person in the world that can watch this replay and reach any other conclusion. You could travel to Nepal, pull indigenous people off a mountain, show them the replay and ask whether the runner is trying to go for the base, or the player, and every single one of them will say he was going for the player. You cannot reach any other conclusion when a man runs past a base, and delivers the force of his entire running start into the lower half of an opposing player. In response to Don Mattingly, David Wright has been called for sliding out of the baseline in pursuit of a player. He was ruled out and the runner at first was ruled out. Mets fans, as I recall, were fine with that.

Centerfield Oct 12 2015 08:52 AM Re: It was a double fucking play Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 12 2015 09:06 AM

Thought #3. Terry Collins Should Be Fired Let me start with this. I like Terry Collins a lot. I have never said he should be fired before. Not with any moves he has made. In fact, I think he is a pretty good manager and a very likeable guy. I don't think Terry should be fired. In fact, he should get an extension. But wow, did he ever fuck up Saturday. And he should be blasted for it so that this shit never happens again. 1. Interference Call As soon as this happened, Terry should be on the field losing his mind that interference was not called. There are very few calls that can't be reviewed, and Terry needs to understand which ones those are. And when that happens, and his SS has been tackled, and he is lying on the ground with a broken leg, Terry needs to be unloading on that umpire. He needs to be gesturing to where Utley started his slide, that he made no attempt to get to the bag. Get tossed from the game. Fire up your team. Don't be a fucking wuss. Had he done this, there would have been less chance that... 2. The Umps allow the Replay to Take Place This is another judgment call on the part of the umpire. You didn't get the interference call, and now you're going to say the neighborhood rule doesn't apply? NO FUCKING WAY. You rip them a new one. You're already tossed from the game. Now you go around ripping out bases. Get suspended. Do everything it takes. Make the umpires understand that you will not stand for it. Because even if it then does to go replay, it makes the replay officials think twice before.. 3. Awarding Utley the Base The replay officials have just watched Collins go ballistic wanting interference. Now the legality of the slide is in question. He just lost his mind when the play went to review. The replay officials have to be thinking, wait should it have been a double play? Should we be reviewing this? Can I possibly take away an out? Am I going to start a riot if I make this call? There is very little a manager can do affirmatively to affect the outcome of a game. This is one of those places where a difference can be made. I like Terry Collins, but he fucked this up just as badly as the umpires did.

dinosaur jesus Oct 12 2015 08:59 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Thought #2: Chase Utley is a Dirty Player. Should be Suspended Well the suspension happened. Kudos to Joe Torre and MLB to have the balls to take a stand, even if it means admitting that the umpires fucked up Saturday night. Utley has had a history of this kind of bullshit. The earlier takeout slide on Tejada in 2010. This slide that someone posted in the IGT: Nothing will ever make me feel better about what happened. But if a new rule is invoked and it goes down in history as "The Utley Rule" and he is forever known to future generations as the dickless coward that he is, then I will take some consolation in this. I'm afraid this one could actually work in Utley's favor in his appeal. He's going to show examples of the rule not being applied in the past, and this is an excellent one.

Centerfield Oct 12 2015 09:00 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

themetfairy wrote: Did Terry appeal the lack of an interference call on Saturday? If not, why not? Because he's a fucking wuss. Chase Utley was not the only one drawing my ire yesterday.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 12 2015 09:08 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Michael Baumann, writing for Grantland, thinks the slide was dirty (plus a great football quote): Well, in a just world, we’d be talking about Jacob deGrom’s comprehensive dominance or Noah Syndergaard redrawing the boundaries of what we can expect in terms of velocity from a starting pitcher. We’d be talking about Zack Greinke being the best no. 2 starter in baseball, or how watching Bartolo Colon jog in from the bullpen in all his moonlike glory is a sight to warm the hearts of nations. But because baseball is a sport for people who like to suffer, we’re instead going to talk about Chase Utley’s takeout slide in Game 2. It was one of the most brutal and unnecessary acts of violence I’ve ever seen during the run of play in a baseball game. He came in late, off the base, and straight into Ruben Tejada’s extended plant leg, breaking his fibula. The slide was so vicious that it divided the ranks of former pro ballplayers, a group of people who apparently unanimously support choking out one’s coworker on television. If a play is borderline for them, it’s beyond the pale for normal people. This isn’t football, which is a shame, because in football, they give you a 15-yard penalty for clipping or roughing the whoever instead of giving you second base. Utley has been suspended for two games, and public opinion is divided between people who support the suspension or want harsher discipline and people who think either (1) that MLB moved the goalposts by deciding all at once to punish hard takeout slides after not having done so for 150 years, or (2) that suspending Utley is an attempt to quiet public criticism rather than to make the game safer. While I’m in favor of suspending Utley, who is appealing the ruling, I’m also sympathetic to the counterarguments. Certainly we don’t want arbitrary post hoc justice, such as it is in matters of on-field rule-breaking. And, further, we’d prefer the league to protect players out of a sense of right and wrong rather than the desire to avoid criticism. To the second point, I’d say that if someone does the right thing, I don’t really care what his motives are. Neither is it a bad thing that MLB is responding immediately to criticism that its game is not as safe as it could be — certainly being responsive to such things is good. And it looks like after this and a rash of other recent incidents, dating back to Jung-Ho Kang’s season-ending injury last month, that MLB will not only suspend Utley but change the rules governing slides. To the first point, that suspending Utley goes against rules and/or precedent, I guess my response is that I don’t really give a shit? If rules and precedent are the last fallback of people who defend such an obviously violent and un-baseball-like action, then maybe we ought to rethink the rules and precedent now, instead of waiting for the next broken leg. Established institutions are not intrinsically good — they are only as good or bad as the ends they service. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/2015- ... ase-utley/

Centerfield Oct 12 2015 10:53 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

First and foremost, the play should have been ruled interference. Section (a)(13) states: (A batter is out when) 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. The explanation follow rule 5.09(a)(13) from official MLB rulebook. 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. There is not a person in the world that can watch this replay and reach any other conclusion. You could travel to Nepal, pull indigenous people off a mountain, show them the replay and ask whether the runner is trying to go for the base, or the player, and every single one of them will say he was going for the player. You cannot reach any other conclusion when a man runs past a base, and delivers the force of his entire running start into the lower half of an opposing player. In response to Don Mattingly, David Wright has been called for sliding out of the baseline in pursuit of a player. He was ruled out and the runner at first was ruled out. Mets fans, as I recall, were fine with that. David Wright has never caused such a vicious hit on another player. In fact, other than Hal McRae, I can't think of another that comes even close.

El Segundo Escupidor Oct 12 2015 11:03 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Thought #2: Chase Utley is a Dirty Player. Should be Suspended SAFE!

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 11:04 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Well, that's an important point. My point was to dispute Mattingly's position that Met fans to the last are blinded by partisanship. I'm not defending or indicting Wright there, so much as defending the integrity of my fellow fan (which, Mr. Mattingly, I'm not always inclined to do).

Ceetar Oct 12 2015 11:08 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Edgy MD wrote: Well, that's an important point. My point was to dispute Mattingly's position that Met fans to the last are blinded by partisanship. I'm not defending or indicting Wright there, so much as defending the integrity of my fellow fan (which, Mr. Mattingly, I'm not always inclined to do). It's irrelevant to me anyway. Even if it was reversed, we'd be wrong. I remember being pissed in 2007, not because I didn't think Marlon Anderson didn't interfere (less so than Ultey though) but because the umpires so selectively call it. I get you can never completely take umpire subjectivity out of it, but with Statcast I bet you can legitimately track Utley's past from first to second and see that he purposely veered.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 11:11 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

If it's irrelevant, please don't respond.

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 11:14 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Hahh!! Rubberman!

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 11:16 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Dude's delusional... http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2015/1 ... crous.html

El Segundo Escupidor Oct 12 2015 11:18 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

d'Kong76 wrote: Dude's delusional... http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2015/1 ... crous.html Not nearly as bad as Doug Glanville who blamed Tejada for the whole thing (video clip in second post of this thread).

Ceetar Oct 12 2015 11:20 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

d'Kong76 wrote: Dude's delusional... http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2015/1 ... crous.html I mean, I don't expect the Dodgers to skewer their own guy, though a "surprised they put him at second" would be plenty tepid. It's the idiots like Larry Bowa and Blylevin that really anger me.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 11:27 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

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.

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 11:29 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

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.

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 11:30 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

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

TransMonk Oct 12 2015 12:34 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 12:44 PM Re: It was a double fucking play Edited 3 time(s), most recently on Oct 12 2015 12:53 PM

d'Kong76 wrote: Dude's delusional... http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2015/1 ... crous.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?

Ceetar Oct 12 2015 12:44 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 12:56 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 12:58 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Dude's delusional... http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2015/1 ... crous.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 Oct 12 2015 12:59 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 01:29 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 01:35 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:09 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:14 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:21 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:23 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:28 PM Re: It was a double fucking play Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 12 2015 02:29 PM

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.

d'Kong76 Oct 12 2015 02:29 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:32 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:33 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:36 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:39 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:44 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:49 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:53 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:54 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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(c) (formerly Rule 9.02(c)), 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 Oct 12 2015 02:55 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:56 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:56 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 02:57 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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 Oct 12 2015 03:02 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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.

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2015 03:05 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

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(c) (formerly Rule 9.02(c)), 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. But the flaw in all that is that they ruled Utley left the field because he was called out and therefore shouldn't be penalized. The only way to negate this whole 'put them back where they belong' nonsense if for ALL players to pretend that ALL calls went against them and start running around re-tagging runners, re-stepping on bases, and diving back to bases after they've already been called out, etc., and then the whole game becomes a farce. It creates the stupid scenario where if Utley was the one hurt (say woozy from the knee to the head) and Tejada not then maybe they rule the other way because they figure that Ruben was more likely to tag him out then he was to get back to the bag. It's fucking guesswork which creates a result which is much worse than the toe 1/2 inch off the base in the first place - but the umps didn't create the system, they just have to manage and enforce it.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 03:11 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Frayed Knot wrote: But the flaw in all that is that they ruled Utley left the field because he was called out and therefore shouldn't be penalized. But Utley did not slide past the bag because he was called out. Utley slid past the bag because he assumed he would be out and wanted to go out breaking up the double play. And sliding past the bag, he ultimately placed the fielder between him and the bag. Decry the presence of "guesswork" if you must, but given all the opportunity in the world, their guess was wrong. I don't call it guesswork though. I call it judgment.

Centerfield Oct 12 2015 03:36 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Whether it's guesswork or judgment, that replay official had the choice to award the bag or not. His hands were not tied. And with the benefit of all that time (it took forever to cart Tejada off the field) and multiple angles of that vicious slide, he made the conscious decision to award Utley the bag. His hands were in no way tied, as Torre suggested. So, I want that fuckhead to come out, identify himself, and sit behind a mic and defend his decision.

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2015 03:47 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Utley didn't slide past the base because he was called out, but he ran off the field because of it and I know I've heard that the replay umps were instructed not to penalize players for doing so. And we can call it 'judgement' all we want, but Utley had no reason to return to the bag nor did Tejada have any reason to re-tag either the base or Utley because both assumed it was pointless to do so. But that's exactly what this system forces the replay umps to do: c/would Utley have returned to the base before Ruben c/would have tagged him trying to do so. Whatever answer they come up with at that point is stupid and, yeah, it's pretty much guesswork.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 03:54 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Frayed Knot wrote: Utley didn't slide past the base because he was called out, but he ran off the field because of it and I know I've heard that the replay umps were instructed not to penalize players for doing so. Yes, you said that. And I pointed out that him placing himself off the bag with the defensive player holding the ball in between the bag should lead to the sound judgment that he would have been out. You're ignoring information that doesn't support your case. Frayed Knot wrote: And we can call it 'judgement' all we want... OK, I will! Frayed Knot wrote: ...., but Utley had no reason to return to the bag nor did Tejada have any reason to re-tag either the base or Utley because both assumed it was pointless to do so. Sounds like a moment that calls for judgment. Frayed Knot wrote: But that's exactly what this system forces the replay umps to do... Yes. Judge. Frayed Knot wrote: ... c/would Utley have returned to the base before Ruben c/would have tagged him trying to do so. Whatever answer they come up with at that point is stupid and, yeah, it's pretty much guesswork. You know the difference. One is drawing a conclusion with facts and information. The other is drawing a conclusion without them. The latter is not the situation here.

dinosaur jesus Oct 12 2015 04:20 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

I'm not conceding that Tejada didn't touch the base. Overturning that call is the screwup that sets up all the other screwups, as far as I'm concerned.

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2015 04:43 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Edgy MD wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: ... c/would Utley have returned to the base before Ruben c/would have tagged him trying to do so. Whatever answer they come up with at that point is stupid and, yeah, it's pretty much guesswork. You know the difference. One is drawing a conclusion with facts and information. The other is drawing a conclusion without them. The latter is not the situation here. Forcing the to draw conclusions based on two events neither one of which would logically occur in the given situation is much closer to guesswork than it is to judgement. And I don't know why we're even arguing these definitions anyway,. My larger point is that proponents of the replay system argued that it was never going to be used to overturn microscopic mistakes, and, when asked what would happen when actions resulted from calls that were later overturned, gave some version of the answer; 'Eh, they'll figure out something'. Well both have happened, and do happen regularly, and there's no way to have the system they have and have these things NOT happen. The human mistakes in that play were made on the field. The replay umps were much more restricted as to what they could do and there the system is more at fault.

Ceetar Oct 12 2015 04:50 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Frayed Knot wrote: Forcing the to draw conclusions based on two events neither one of which would logically occur in the given situation is much closer to guesswork than it is to judgement. And I don't know why we're even arguing these definitions anyway,. My larger point is that proponents of the replay system argued that it was never going to be used to overturn microscopic mistakes, and, when asked what would happen when actions resulted from calls that were later overturned, gave some version of the answer; 'Eh, they'll figure out something'. Well both have happened, and do happen regularly, and there's no way to have the system they have and have these things NOT happen. The human mistakes in that play were made on the field. The replay umps were much more restricted as to what they could do and there the system is more at fault. That's probably part of the rational for interference being technically unreviewable, as they must have figured there would be too many moving parts and judgement calls on runners.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 05:37 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Frayed Knot wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: ... c/would Utley have returned to the base before Ruben c/would have tagged him trying to do so. Whatever answer they come up with at that point is stupid and, yeah, it's pretty much guesswork. You know the difference. One is drawing a conclusion with facts and information. The other is drawing a conclusion without them. The latter is not the situation here. Forcing the to draw conclusions based on two events neither one of which would logically occur in the given situation is much closer to guesswork than it is to judgement. Forcing the whom? to draw conclusions? And no, it's not. As noted above. Frayed Knot wrote: And I don't know why we're even arguing these definitions anyway,. Because it's true. Because words mean things. And the words you choose support the argument, even if they don't accurately describe the facts. So that should be clarified to get at the truth. Frayed Knot wrote: My larger point... Which is always how someone shifts an argument in which their smaller-point-which-supports-the-larger point is shown to be insupportable. Frayed Knot wrote: ... is that proponents of the replay system argued that it was never going to be used to overturn microscopic mistakes, and, when asked what would happen when actions resulted from calls that were later overturned, gave some version of the answer; 'Eh, they'll figure out something'. And then you switch to a strawman argument.

Zvon Oct 12 2015 05:59 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

dinosaur jesus wrote: I'm not conceding that Tejada didn't touch the base. Overturning that call is the screwup that sets up all the other screwups, as far as I'm concerned. Most certainly this imo^

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2015 06:22 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Edgy MD wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: My larger point... Which is always how someone shifts an argument in which their smaller-point-which-supports-the-larger-point is shown to be insupportable. Frayed Knot wrote: ... is that proponents of the replay system argued that it was never going to be used to overturn microscopic mistakes, and, when asked what would happen when actions resulted from calls that were later overturned, gave some version of the answer; 'Eh, they'll figure out something'. And then you switch to a strawman argument. Fuck off with your semantics. I'm done here.

Edgy MD Oct 12 2015 07:58 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

I answered your argument, as you answered that of another poster. Neither of those responses is semantics.

Edgy MD Oct 16 2015 10:14 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Just stumbled across this. Apart from the Bizarro World reality of Chipper Jones defending the Mets and Edgardo Alfonzo seemingly trolling him for his trouble, how weird is it that after a career as elite baseball players, these dudes end up seemingly wanting to spend their time doing what the rest of us mortals do: being dicks on the internet?

Centerfield Oct 16 2015 10:20 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

I am embarrassed to admit how much I am liking Chipper Jones these days.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 16 2015 10:33 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Centerfield wrote: I am embarrassed to admit how much I am liking Chipper Jones these days. You and whoever his waitress at BigBoobs Bar and Grill is tonight both, buddy.

seawolf17 Oct 16 2015 10:36 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Just stumbled across this. Apart from the Bizarro World reality of Chipper Jones defending the Mets and Edgardo Alfonzo seemingly trolling him for his trouble, how weird is it that after a career as elite baseball players, these dudes end up seemingly wanting to spend their time doing what the rest of us mortals do: being dicks on the internet? That's awesome. And yes, I'm all in on Chipper now too. Go figure.

Frayed Knot Oct 16 2015 10:38 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

Chipper's been pulling for the Mets because he and deGrom are from the same hometown -- Deland, Florida (should be retitled as deLand in honor of deGrom) -- and I think Larry said that his mom & pop both went to and met at Stetson U

Edgy MD Oct 16 2015 10:46 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

deGrom comes from deLand and went to college at Stetson... in deLand. Ties Daniel Murphy (Jacksonville-born and Jacksonville State-educated) with being the Floridian Mets who traveled the least ways to get to college. True story: Stetson was founded by a rich-assed New Yorker Henry DeLand as "DeLand Academy" in 1883 but was changed to Stetson University by 1889 when DeLand's fortunes started failing and the hat guy took over as the main benefactor. The team's actual name: The Stetson Hatters.

Ceetar Oct 18 2015 09:50 AM Re: It was a double fucking play

last week tonight

MFS62 Oct 18 2015 03:13 PM Re: It was a double fucking play

Edgy MD wrote: deGrom comes from deLand and went to college at Stetson... in deLand. Ties Daniel Murphy (Jacksonville-born and Jacksonville State-educated) with being the Floridian Mets who traveled the least ways to get to college. True story: Stetson was founded by a rich-assed New Yorker Henry DeLand as "DeLand Academy" in 1883 but was changed to Stetson University by 1889 when DeLand's fortunes started failing and the hat guy took over as the main benefactor. The team's actual name: The Stetson Hatters. And for many years, the Stetson hats were manufactured in Danbury, Ct. (The Hat Capitol of the World) http://www.danburymuseum.org/danburymuseum/Hatting.html Tell THAT to the next cowboy you meet. Later