(some i have answers for some i do i do not)
Was it a clean play?
Ans in the sense that i do not think utlley was thinking about injurng tejeda, but the slide at 2nd is one of the leagal “dirty”in plays allowed as long the runner can reach the bag in the coruse of his slide and they did over turn the original call and call him safe. so how it could be called dirty is a gray area at best.
Wasn’t it a “neighborhood” play?
sure looked that way to me. To my cerebal palsy eyes(which do not judge things like that well) looked like tejda foot caught the side of the bag and with the neighborhood area designed to protect infeilder from injury,( did not work for Tejeda) so in my mind utley was out. it was not classified as a neighbhood play. So it could be challenged and over turned.
Why did the Mets not appeal whether utley touched 2nd? Why should they have to? the play was at 2nd part of the review should have been seeing if utley touched 2nd. I’m not sure how this part of the rule works but it seems unfair to have one team apealing whether the runner touched 2nd after the other team used a chalenege to see if the felider touched the same 2nd base , if the Dodgers won the chanlenge but lost it because the Mets win the apeal saying the runner do not touch 2nd. Would have La lost their challenge on a techncallity. It is not like utley missed 1st base so the only basein question was 2nd the base at the subject of the review. The Mets could have risked a bad throw to 2nd on appeal. would have been unfair also. In my mind it should follow th nfl model for replay if there is a safe or out review at a base both the runners and fielding actions should be reviewed.
Are the Mets going to be short handed without Tejeda?
yes and no
the player will not be tejeda but the mets can change their roster (unlike the old days)
Playing for Tejeda’s qiuck recovery.