The Chase Utley Rule

I'm pretty sure Frank Robinson and George Brett won't approve, but baseball finally acted to protect pivot men from baserunners.

All it took was a broken leg on national TV. 

Chase Utley's playoff game-deciding cheap shot was the catalyst for Rule 6.01(j). The rule is pretty simple: A baserunner breaking up the double play has to slide, he has to touch the base, and he has to make an effort to stay on the base. He also can't swerve out of his pathway.

The thing is, 6.01(j) is only there because the umpires long ago decided to abdicate their responsibility. Rule 6.05(m) should have sufficed, but umpires never make that call. Perhaps taking the play out of the "umpire's judgment" will work.

This is good change. Less good: replay is being expanded to include the "neighborhood play," which it didn't cover last year on the basis that it would force pivot men to hang around the base longer and lead to more second base collisions. I suppose the rule-makers figure adding 6.01(j) will take care of that. What we're going to get is a repeat of what has happened with slides: Plays that were never questioned before replay will be now, with frame-by-frame review of whether the fielder's foot was in contact with the base while he handled the ball.

Joe Posnanski was probably right last year when he said replay should be only at full speed. If the call isn't clearly wrong at full speed, let it stand.

The Utley suspension

Chase Utley watches GameThree of the Dodgers-Mets
division series from the dugout.

Chase Utley was suspended Sunday for Saturday's excessive and injurious takeout of Mets shortstop Ruben Tejada. He appealed the suspension and was, as is typical of baseball suspensions, eligible to play in Monday's game.

I wrote about the Saturday play here and expanded upon that post in the Monday print column. But while I think Utley's play was dangerous and, by the rulebook description, illegal, I can't see that the suspension is warranted.

The governing rule on this is 5.09 (a)(13):

[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;  

(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

Both in the itself and the rulebook commentary emphasize the umpire's judgment. In practice, umpires have chosen not to exercise that judgment. In practice, umps will only make that call if the baserunner assaults the infielder with a tire iron. The umpire, Chris Guccione, followed the tradition, which is why Utley's defenders can legitimately say it was a legal play.

I may be taking an overly lawyerly approach to this, but I can't see how the suspension can stand up. I also don't think making Utley actually miss games is necessarily the point.

Whether Utley takes the field again or not, Joe Torre has now put the umpires on notice: Enforce Rule 5.09 (a)(13). The issuance of the suspension effectively tells Guccione and the his brethren that his judgment on the the play was wrong. And it warns baserunners not to repeat what Utley did.

I fully expect that Rule 5.09(a)(13) will be revised this winter, with expanded commentary and less emphasis on the judgment of the umpire. Whether it is or not, stricter enforcement of 5.09(a)(13) is overdue and perhaps sufficient to cool off the aggressive basecrashers.