Last season Major League Baseball and the Major League Baseball Players association agreed to institute a new rule restricting how much a base runner can do to break up a double play. The text as it appears in the rule book is as follows.

Rule 6.01(i) — 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.

As with most rules this one was motivated by a specific play. The nickname for the rule is the Chase Utley slide, because of the following play from the 2015 NLCS.

That play provoked a great deal of outrage against Utley, and it’s easy to see why. Tejada, the middle infielder Utley slid into, suffered a broken fibula in his right leg. This outrage forced the MLB to respond and a year later we have the above slide rule. But how has it gone so far?

From the umpires perspective fairly well, if the results of instant replay review are to be trusted. Of the 36 times that the Utley rule was challenged last year only 4 of them were upheld. That is 11.11% of the time, a sharp drop off from the 51.40% of total reviews. Another interesting tidbit is that just 1 review, 2.78%, was initiated by the Umpires, again a falloff from 11.17% of total reviews (the largest group). Those numbers are a small sample size, but indicate that the umpires are generally getting it right, at least according to the umpires.

Despite that reaction in the media and among fans has been mostly negative. Old school commentators have been decrying the removal of toughness from the game. While other fans are complaining about the slowing of game pace thanks to the managerial reviews associated with the rule.

In regards to the toughness issue, that’s highly subjective, and in many ways a little silly. Toughness is not only expressed through willingness to do physical harm, but can also be staying in the batter’s box against Aroldis Chapman fastballs. Baseball is a non-contact sport, you should not be able to impact a play through physical, non incidental contact. Those who say otherwise are full of macho nonsense.

In terms of the pace of play, last season there were 36 slide interference calls that were challenged by managers, 2.35% of the 1531 total instant replay reviews. Certainly that shows that the slide rule has an impact on pace of play, but it seems a very small part of the larger issue that instant replay reviews present, if pace of play is something you are concerned about.

That would appear to answer the two major criticisms of the rule, however; in doing research for this post I watched all 36 reviewed plays and noticed a third, less discussed issue.

Many of the more controversial slides happened at the beginning of the season, when people still didn’t have a clear idea of exactly how to implement the rule. As a result Umpires called slides that fit any of the above descriptions illegal, even if they posed no threat to the infielder.

This is the heart of the issue. The slide rule exists to protect middle infielders, dangerous slides should be called, non dangerous slides should not. Too often last season we saw players over slide the base and be called out. Umpires have to remember the spirit of rules like this when enforcing them. This improved as the season went on, and I expect it to be the norm next year. If they are able to do that, we should hear significantly less criticism.

All in all the implementation of the slide rule was a success. Physically obstructing a fielder has no place in baseball. Sure there were some bumps, but it was the first year, things will improve.