RA Deserves His Own Thread

[batmagadanleadoff]

...and I'll kick it off with this bit of news.

Two No-No's in one month?

Mets manager Terry Collins said after the game that the team will appeal the hit, saying the play instead should have been ruled an error by third baseman David Wright, according to ESPNNewYork.com's Adam Rubin.

http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=320613130

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: ...and I'll kick it off with this bit of news. Two No-No's in one month? Mets manager Terry Collins said after the game that the team will appeal the hit, saying the play instead should have been ruled an error by third baseman David Wright, according to ESPNNewYork.com's Adam Rubin. http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=320613130

I didn't know that a hit/error call was appealable.

[nymr83]

I still haven't SEEN the play, but Howie said the scoring was kosher, I wouldn't want it changed after the fact- if its even debateable then the official scorer's initial call should stand.

[batmagadanleadoff]

An MLB committee can reverse an official scorer's decision. A reversal would give the Mets -- who had gone 8,019 games in franchise history without a no-hitter until Johan Santana performed the feat June 1 -- their second this month.

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/sports/pro/baseball&sa=MLB&eid=8049989

[MFS62]

There is precedent for an official scorer changing a ruling after the game. Used to happen all the time. But I'm not sure if it has been done for a no-hitter.

Later

[Ceetar]

MFS62 wrote: There is precedent for an official scorer changing a ruling after the game. Used to happen all the time. But I'm not sure if it has been done for a no-hitter. Later

That'd be really weird. It doesn't matter now anyway though. I didn't think you could get a no-hitter when you let a run score? (I always figured that's how the Mets would get theirs..and maybe lose to boot)

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I don;t want it that way. This just illustrates further how random and freaky one is. We all know what happened out there. He threw a poifict game.

[Guest themetfairy]

[TransMonk]

I think last night put RA officially in the bidding for NL starter at the All-Star Game...although, Matt Cain helped himself a lot as well.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Ceetar wrote: That'd be really weird. It doesn't matter now anyway though. I didn't think you could get a no-hitter when you let a run score?

Of course you can. It wouldn't be a shutout, but it would certainly be a no-hitter.

[Edgy MD]

They've changed some of the rules over the years, even going so far as to strike some no-hitters from the record book, so I wouldn't necessarily be surprised if they decided to discount no-hitters that weren't shutouts. I think they ruled --- 20 years or so ago --- that it had go at least nine innings and your team had to win. Poor David Palmer had a perfect game stricken from the records, because it had only gone five innings, before being shortened by rain. The rational defense of Palmer would be that he didn't ask it to rain; he just went out and did his job. Perfectly. He even made a point of going out and throwing the first four innings perfectly in his next start. Against the Mets, I think.

Darryl Kile's no-hitter against the Mets in 1993 featured a run scored by Jeff McKnight. I imagine there is some letdown in pitching the game of your career (unless you're Nolan Ryan or somebody), and still not keeping the other team off the board.

Just a staggering thought that, had David Wright been at the top of his game, we might've had two perfect games in one evening.

[Ceetar]

yeah, did some reading this morning. I've heard the 'not if a run scores' thing before but it doesn't appear to be accurate. It does have to be 9 innings, and that rule was changed in 1991. It may be related, the idea being that if you pitch a complete game no-hit 8IP loss and give up a run you don't get the no-hitter.

I don't care if they change it. The accuracy of the bookkeeping is important, and they're gonna be pretty damn positive he would've been out through normal effort if they change it.

[metirish]

Nymr83 wrote: I still haven't SEEN the play, but Howie said the scoring was kosher, I wouldn't want it changed after the fact- if its even debateable then the official scorer's initial call should stand.

yeah, wouldn't want it after the fact......

[Edgy MD]

There's the ongoing issue that there really aren't professional standards among official scorers. It's not as bad as it used to be, but it's still a safe bet that tough calls are more likely to fall on the side of giving a hit to the home player. And the league office is the objective arbiter.

I guess what I mean to the say is the league should be reviewing close calls without a team having to pettily diminish themselves by filing a protest.

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: There's the ongoing issue that there really aren't professional standards among official scorers. It's not as bad as it used to be, but it's still a safe bet that tough calls are more likely to fall on the side of giving a hit to the home player. And the league office is the objective arbiter.

yeah, like the Jeter hit the other day. stupid.

I saw the play, but never saw a side by side to see where Upton was. They do change things very frequently, I doubt all of those are initiated by protest.

[batmagadanleadoff]

[Frayed Knot]

There were a whole bunch of stricken no-nos from the record books when they more narrowly defined the criteria, but giving up runs wasn't one of them. Unless you're Ralph Kiner that is who always uses the phrase "No-Run, No-Hit games" as if his standards are higher than just a plain "No-hit" games.

What was mainly knocked out were oddities where pitchers had no-hitters but of less than nine innings, or where they didn't finish the game, including:
- rain-shortened affairs*
- games where a road pitcher had a no-hitter but also gave up run(s) while his team was getting shut-out so he never pitched the bottom of the 9th
- no hitters that were tied thru nine where the pitcher gave up a hit or hits in extra innings. Jim Maloney of the Reds had one of these against the Mets where they beat him in the 10th
- the famous one where Babe Ruth (pitching) opened the game with a walk, then proceeded to argue ball four and got tossed. His replacement came on, picked off Ruth's runner, and then retired the next twenty-six straight. That one used to be counted, isn't any more because the reliever didn't face 27 hitters.
- and other assorted oddities





* I had a rain-shortened affair once. Her husband went jogging but then came home early when it started to rain

[batmagadanleadoff]

Frayed Knot wrote: There were a whole bunch of stricken no-nos from the record books ... - the famous one where Babe Ruth (pitching) opened the game with a walk, then proceeded to argue ball four and got tossed. His replacement came on, picked off Ruth's runner, and then retired the next twenty-six straight. That one used to be counted, isn't any more because the reliever didn't face 27 hitters.

I'm surprised that this game was ever counted as a no-hitter. I thought that one of the elements of a no-no is that the pitcher throw a complete game.

[Ceetar]

that goes into the 'combined' no-hitter category now. I love that one as a caricature of Babe Ruth. makes me laugh every time.

[Frayed Knot]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: There were a whole bunch of stricken no-nos from the record books ... - the famous one where Babe Ruth (pitching) opened the game with a walk, then proceeded to argue ball four and got tossed. His replacement came on, picked off Ruth's runner, and then retired the next twenty-six straight. That one used to be counted, isn't any more because the reliever didn't face 27 hitters. I'm surprised that this game was ever counted as a no-hitter. I thought that one of the elements of a no-no is that the pitcher throw a complete game.

Well, viewed from one angle you could call it complete in that he got all 27 outs - he just did it without being the starter and without facing 27 batters.
And that's what the "clean-up" campaign was designed to do, more clearly define what was and what wasn't a No-hitter by getting rid of all those grey-area deals.
Call it the anti-asterisk crusade.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: that goes into the 'combined' no-hitter category now. I love that one as a caricature of Babe Ruth. makes me laugh every time.

Obviously. But my issue was that the reliever, as opposed to the team, was once credited with a no-hitter.

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, it's still a no-hitter, just not a complete game affair. Neil Allen had one of those once also. Not a no-hitter, but a game he entered in relief with no outs in the first, and he went on to complete it. Under the old rules, he got credited with a complete came, but no more.

OE: HA! He replaced Leiter!

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/OAK/OAK198805310.shtml

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: that goes into the 'combined' no-hitter category now. I love that one as a caricature of Babe Ruth. makes me laugh every time. Obviously. But my issue was that the reliever, as opposed to the team, was once credited with a no-hitter.

well, he got all 27 outs right?

*looks up the reliever* Ernie Shore. Actually, that was the first combined no-hitter.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: that goes into the 'combined' no-hitter category now. I love that one as a caricature of Babe Ruth. makes me laugh every time. Obviously. But my issue was that the reliever, as opposed to the team, was once credited with a no-hitter. well, he got all 27 outs right? *looks up the reliever* Ernie Shore. Actually, that was the first combined no-hitter.

But he didn't pitch a complete game.

[HahnSolo]

Frayed Knot wrote: - games where a road pitcher had a no-hitter but also gave up run(s) while his team was getting shut-out so he never pitched the bottom of the 9th

Andy Hawkins, anybody? No hits but 4 runs thanks to a crappy MFY defense (3 errors in the 8th).
http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1990/B07010CHA1990.htm


Also, in looking at the Wright replay, that's a hit. If they called that an error Keith and Gary would have been all over the official scorer.

[batmagadanleadoff]

- games where a road pitcher had a no-hitter but also gave up run(s) while his team was getting shut-out so he never pitched the bottom of the 9th Andy Hawkins, anybody? No hits but 4 runs thanks to a crappy MFY defense (3 errors in the 8th). http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1990/B07010CHA1990.htm Also, in looking at the Wright replay, that's a hit. If they called that an error Keith and Gary would have been all over the official scorer.

I doubt that the Rays lone hit will be reversed. But just to play Devil's Advocate: how can you be so sure that it was a hit without seeing video of the batter running down the basepath? Are you basing your opinion on what you believe was the level of difficulty in fielding that grounder cleanly, or that the batter is not as slow as, say, Ike Davis? Just askin'.

[TransMonk]

HahnSolo wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: - games where a road pitcher had a no-hitter but also gave up run(s) while his team was getting shut-out so he never pitched the bottom of the 9th Andy Hawkins, anybody? No hits but 4 runs thanks to a crappy MFY defense (3 errors in the 8th). http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1990/B07010CHA1990.htm

I attended that game as a 15 year old. Bizarre.

[HahnSolo]

- games where a road pitcher had a no-hitter but also gave up run(s) while his team was getting shut-out so he never pitched the bottom of the 9th Andy Hawkins, anybody? No hits but 4 runs thanks to a crappy MFY defense (3 errors in the 8th). http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1990/B07010CHA1990.htm Also, in looking at the Wright replay, that's a hit. If they called that an error Keith and Gary would have been all over the official scorer. I doubt that the Rays lone hit will be reversed. But just to play Devil's Advocate: how can you be so sure that it was a hit without seeing video of the batter running down the basepath? Are you basing your opinion on what you believe was the level of difficulty in fielding that grounder cleanly, or that the batter is not as slow as, say, Ike Davis? Just askin'.

Upton being the baserunner versus, say, Jose Molina, does make a difference in my opinion, yes. I'll also assume--and you are right, I have no idea how quickly Upton was getting down the line--that DAvid is going for the barehand because he thinks if he gloves it he has no chance to get him. A slower runner, Wright probably gloves it and can make the play.

From years of watching baseball, plays like that seem to be ruled hits way more often than errors.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

It was obvious to me that Wright flubbed the play because he was aware Upton had wheels and rushed as a result but I want to call it an error because he failed to pick it cleanly, whether or not he had a shot with a strong throw we'll never know.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Shades of Ray Knight.