Chase Utley Suspended for games 3 and 4

[The Oldtimer]

No he didn't. Did you watch the video? He is in line with the right field side of the 2nd base bag when his knee starts to come down. His knee doesn't touch dirt until after. Late slide. And I didn't say beyond the base, I said towards right field, like how the video shows.

How you ever seen a "hook slide", where a player slides around the bag and touch the bag with his hand? It happens at home plate quite often. The umps usually don't call a runner out of the base path. There really is no given base path. Utley was in the base path when he slide according to MLB rules.

 

[The Oldtimer]

Let's ignore rule 5.09 for now and look instead at rule 6.01.

Rule 6.01(a)(5) states:

"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."

So an argument could be made that players who are out at second should not be allowed to intentionally take out the fielder with their slide since they would be a put-out runner interfering with an effort to put out another runner, and it would be a pretty good argument.

Also,

Rule 6.01(a)(10)

In which a runner who fails to avoid a fielder and interferes with a throw will be called for interference. That's a long one because enforcement is complicated, so I didn't transpose it here.

Additionally, it is important to note that the baseline is also defined in Rule 5.09 as the line between bases with three feet on either side. Sliding after the base puts you out of the baseline.

Of course, to make this more explicit, it simply needs to be designated that a genuine effort must be made to reach the base. Sliding past it or way wide of it to break up the double play would not be a genuine effort at the base. Boom, no more takeout slides. But certain reasonable interpretations of current rules could also suffice, I think.

Good comment and IMO, Utley should have been out, even though Tejada never touched second base. I don't think that was the problem, the problem was Utley being suspended!!

 

[Darkstone42]

Good comment and IMO, Utley should have been out, even though Tejada never touched second base. I don't think that was the problem, the problem was Utley being suspended!!

Utley should have been out and the batter should have been out in enforcement of rule 6.01(a), but that's to say nothing of the league's right to suspend.

Suspensions are levied not for illegal plays so much as for reckless or intentionally dangerous plays. That is, this play was illegal, but only insofar as it was interference, just as a HBP is illegal only insofar as it allows the batter to take first base. There is a consequence to the offender/benefit to the victim, but they aren't explicitly suspendable offenses. If one of these offenses is also deemed especially dangerous, reckless, or intentionally harmful, the league actually does have full right to issue a suspension, just as they do in the case of intentional HBP.

 

[The Oldtimer]

Utley should have been out and the batter should have been out in enforcement of rule 6.01(a), but that's to say nothing of the league's right to suspend.

Suspensions are levied not for illegal plays so much as for reckless or intentionally dangerous plays. That is, this play was illegal, but only insofar as it was interference, just as a HBP is illegal only insofar as it allows the batter to take first base. There is a consequence to the offender/benefit to the victim, but they aren't explicitly suspendable offenses. If one of these offenses is also deemed especially dangerous, reckless, or intentionally harmful, the league actually does have full right to issue a suspension, just as they do in the case of intentional HBP.

Yeah,, then what is your opinion, should Utley be suspended??