Second and Third Thoughts on Slides

During the postseason, I and many others wrote about takeout slides after Chase Utley broke Ruben Tejada's leg. It became a pretty hot topic around baseball. MLB, wisely, sought to protect its players from serious injury and changed the rules governing slides at seconds during double play attempts. On paper it sounded reasonable.

It didn't take long before it turned into something of a nightmare.

In the Blue Jays third game of the season, they were down 3-2 in the top of the 9th. They loaded the bases with one out when Edwin Encarnacion hit a bouncer to third. Even Longoria backed up, took the big hop and fired to second. Logan Forsythe took the throw, stepped to the infield side of second, and turned to fire to first with Jose Bautista bearing down on him. As Bautista slid towards the base, Forsythe uncorked a wild throw that one hopped first after Encarnacion was already across the base, and ended up in the Rays' dugout. The tying run scored on the play, and with the ball out of play, Josh Donaldson who started on second was awarded home. That put the Jays up 4-3 with runners on 2nd and 3rd and two out.

But wait. The Rays challenged the play.

Oh shit, I thought, was Bautista's slide legal? Was this going to be the first time we see someone called out on the new slide rule? Is it going to cost the Blue Jays a chance at winning the game?

In real time, I thought the slide was good, but as soon as they showed the replay from the first base camera I suspected there was going to be trouble as it was clear that Bautista, almost certainly intentionally, stuck his left arm out and made contact with Forsythe's leg.

As I suspected, the call on the field was overturned, and both Bautista and Encarnacion were called out on interference. Game over, 3-2 Rays.

This brings me to my second thought on takeout slides: WHAT THE FUCK? How can you call him out on that? He barely touched him!

I have to admit that had this not prevented the Blue Jays from taking the lead and possibly winning the game, my reaction likely would have been tempered. After some objective thought and looking more carefully at the explanation later given by MLB, I realized and accepted that the call was correct according to the new rules, and even under the old ones. Last year you could barrel roll into a fielder, but I don't think you could stick your arm out.

Just when the backlash died down a few days later, it happened again. Not just the new slide rule being called, but a game ending because of it. The Astros were trailing the Brewers 6-4 in the top of the 9th with one out and threatening to score. On a ground ball up the middle, Colby Rasmus slid well past second base as the Brewers got the force at second, with no attempt to throw to first. The umpire immediately called both him and Jose Altuve out on runner's interference. The Astros challenged, the call was upheld, and the game ended.

Twice. In the first week of the season. Games ended on the so-called Chase Utley rule. Could it have been any worse?

And so here we are, in the midst of a minor crisis. How do they fix this? Do they change it? Do they scrap the new rule entirely and just call the old ones (which they generally didn't)?

For those who are unaware, here is the now infamous Rule 6.01(j):

(j) (7.14) Sliding to Bases on Double Play Attempts
If a runner does not engage in a bona fide slide, and initiates (or attempts to make) contact with the fielder for the purpose of breaking up a double play, he should be called for interference under this Rule 6.01. A “bona fide slide” for purposes of Rule 6.01 occurs when the runner:
(1) begins his slide (i.e., makes contact with the ground) before reaching the base;
(2) is able and attempts to reach the base with his hand or foot;
(3) is able and attempts to remain on the base (except home plate) after completion of the slide; and
(4) slides within reach of the base without changing his pathway for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder.

This brings me to my third thought on takeout slides that was very much like my first: if the player is theoretically trying to get to the base before the throw, then MAKE them get to the base. I think the new rule above is good, but the part about remaining on the base, to me anyway, is unnecessary and is the root of the problem. I don't really have a problem with runners sliding past the base as long as they touch it first. In doing that, they risk being tagged out if the fielder drops the ball, so I don't really see a problem with it as long as the other criteria outlined are met.

An alternative is to go to the unwritten softball rule in leagues where sliding is permitted which is to slide straight into the base. I think there is merit in this because the predictable path of the runner makes it easy for middle infielders to avoid contact and easy for the umpires to judge if the runner is intentionally trying to interfere with the fielder turning the double play. This is also in line with my theory that if the runner is trying to get to the base before the throw, then they should actually touch the base.

I doubt MLB will get to this point any time soon. I think there is an appetite to maintain at least some possibility of preserving one of the few physical confrontations possible on the baseball field, but who knows. Maybe the rules will become so murky and difficult to judge that they have to go with what I think is the simplest solution to the problem.

And problems with new rules isn't really new. When MLB introduced new rules attempting to curb collisions on plays at home plate, there were problems with it initially. After the uproar from players and fans and reporters, MLB made the necessary adjustments and clarifications, and the players eventually adjusted.

Two games were prematurely ended on this rule, and MLB is going to have to do something about it. Whether it be changing the rule or simply providing a clearer explanation of what is and isn't a bona fide slide, it is going to be interesting in the next few days to see what happens.

-matt