Jump to content

Olney: Changes in Second Base Slide for 2016


weams

Recommended Posts

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/14742914/mlb-players-union-closer-rule-change-slides-second-base

There is a desire on both sides to eliminate slides on which a baserunner goes beyond the effort to reach second to make contact with middle infielders. That is what happened with Tejada, as Chase Utley was nowhere near the base when he crashed into Tejada's leg. Utley was given a two-game suspension by Major League Baseball for that play, a punishment that has been appealed.

The language on the rule has not entirely been resolved, and there is some question about whether slides in question will be subject to instant-replay review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The Tejada slide injury was unfortunate. However, the reason, IMO, that it has had a lot of play is because of the time of year it happens. Tejada had his back to Utley when he caught the flip and pivoted into the slide. He left himself vulnerable to the hard "illegal" slide. This certainly wasn't a typical DP ball and to make a rule change based on that play doesn't make sense to me. Any player that has his back to the incoming sliding player is vunerable whether it is a clean or dirty slide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tejada slide injury was unfortunate. However, the reason, IMO, that it has had a lot of play is because of the time of year it happens. Tejada had his back to Utley when he caught the flip and pivoted into the slide. He left himself vulnerable to the hard "illegal" slide. This certainly wasn't a typical DP ball and to make a rule change based on that play doesn't make sense to me. Any player that has his back to the incoming sliding player is vunerable whether it is a clean or dirty slide.

If it took an injury in the playoffs to get this change made then so be it.

There is no reason for them to allow a play that looks wrong and carries a serious safety risk for all involved players.

I thought it was pretty ridiculous that they added a rule to protect catchers and didn't address this at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it took an injury in the playoffs to get this change made then so be it.

There is no reason for them to allow a play that looks wrong and carries a serious safety risk for all involved players.

I thought it was pretty ridiculous that they added a rule to protect catchers and didn't address this at the same time.

Exactly right. How do they put in a rule protecting catchers when middle infielders are exposed in much the same way? Big oversight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it took an injury in the playoffs to get this change made then so be it.

There is no reason for them to allow a play that looks wrong and carries a serious safety risk for all involved players.

I thought it was pretty ridiculous that they added a rule to protect catchers and didn't address this at the same time.

But won't the game lose all the 17-year-old guys and 97-year-old Ty Cobb fans who really only watch to see the violence? Think of the revenues, man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it took an injury in the playoffs to get this change made, then so be it.

There is no reason for them to allow a play that looks wrong and carries a serious safety risk for all involved players.

I thought it was pretty ridiculous that they added a rule to protect catchers and didn't address this at the same time.

OCTOBER 12th:

I may be reaching here, but I suspect that the fact that the umpires called Utley safe and sent him back onto the field to score the eventual go-ahead run factored into their decision.

I'm not necessarily saying that it should have, but I do believe that that is what made so many people (outside of Dodger fans) so infuriated over it all. It was a pivotal play (and subsequently, a crucial call) in an extremely high-stakes game.

More significantly than whether or not Utley's suspension holds up, if this acts as the catalyst for MLB to revisit this issue (BOTH the safety issue AND the fairness issue of awarding a runner a base that he has no business being awarded) in the off-season, then at least something good will have come out of it.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/150396-2015-NLDS-Mets-vs-Dodgers/page6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and I think they should ban outfielders diving for balls because some have gotten hurt. No one should get hurt--ever--for any reason. We must take steps to remove risk of any and all injuries. I also propose using a pitching machine so pitchers will not get hurt. No more TJ surgeries!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and I think they should ban outfielders diving for balls because some have gotten hurt. No one should get hurt--ever--for any reason. We must take steps to remove risk of any and all injuries. I also propose using a pitching machine so pitchers will not get hurt. No more TJ surgeries!

Yea, let's not do reasonable things because we can't implement the totally ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and I think they should ban outfielders diving for balls because some have gotten hurt. No one should get hurt--ever--for any reason. We must take steps to remove risk of any and all injuries. I also propose using a pitching machine so pitchers will not get hurt. No more TJ surgeries!

Talk about your bad analogies....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long overdue IMO. Some of these slides are senseless and risk serious career ending injuries.

If a ref can determine that a soccer player was aiming for the ball instead of the player on a slide tackle I think baseball can work this rule out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...