Skip to content

Quote of the Day: Jered Weaver on the disruption of his no-hitter routine

May 3, 2012, 9:40 AM EDT

weaver-120502.standard[1] Getty Images

When someone is throwing a no-hitter, every little thing matters. Routine. Habit. Superstition. A guy throwing a no-no is not going to move from the spot on the bench he’s been sitting in all game long because that might mess with his flow.

But Jered Weaver bolted from his spot on the bench between the eighth and ninth innings and he disappeared. That could have messed with his flow, but it probably would have messed with it way worse if he didn’t get up.  Why? Because as he told Harold Reynolds on the MLB Network after the game, there was a good reason for it:

“I had to pee so bad it was unbelievable.”

I love the age in which we live. We’d never learn that about Sandy Koufax or Nolan Ryan’s no-hitters.

  1. hasbeen5 - May 3, 2012 at 9:51 AM

    At least he didn’t pull a Michael Bourne

    • cur68 - May 3, 2012 at 9:57 AM

      Lets hope he washed his hands, after. I have m’doubts on if Bourne did. And that is just yucky.

      • Utley's Hair - May 3, 2012 at 11:02 AM

        That was part of the strategy—pee on his hands, and who would want to go anywhere near the ball?

      • cur68 - May 3, 2012 at 11:41 AM

        Dang, man…that’s….gross. Effective, but gross.

      • Utley's Hair - May 3, 2012 at 1:16 PM

        Effectiveness ain’t always pretty—or sanitary—man.

      • ltzep75 - May 3, 2012 at 2:26 PM

        Moises Alou begs to differ

  2. phukyouk - May 3, 2012 at 9:56 AM

    I’m willing to bet if he had a perfecto going on instead of a no no he would have pissed himself rather than moving…

    • ajcardsfan - May 3, 2012 at 10:02 AM

      And there’s nothing wrong with that, after all, peeing your pants is cool

      • jerryball22 - May 3, 2012 at 10:16 AM

        call me miles davis

  3. racksie - May 3, 2012 at 10:32 AM

    I’ve made this argument before: A no-no is actually a perfect game. No hits, no walks. Somehow, probably because it sounds cool, a no hitter became a no-no. Of course it’s wrong and I’ll get savaged for it, but it is reality. Internet researchers, start your search engines!

    • racksie - May 3, 2012 at 10:43 AM

      Seriously, think about it: No hits, No walks=no no. No hitter= no. It happened sometime in the 90’s. Again savage me all you want, it is reality.

      • wihalofan - May 3, 2012 at 11:30 AM

        I think it’s called a no-no because it’s no runs, no hits.

      • racksie - May 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

        Disagree. Quick name the number of no hitters where their was a run scored…..Now why would that make it a no-no? I’m telling you, it changed with the internet era. It sounds cool, but it is wrong.

      • bayballtim - May 3, 2012 at 12:30 PM

        Actually there have been a few pitchers to lose games when they pitched no hitters. Typically a combination of a walk or two and an error leads to runs without a hit.

        Andy Hawkins – 1990
        Ken Johnson – 1964

        Google it.

      • racksie - May 3, 2012 at 12:33 PM

        Yes. That is a grand total of TWO. Out of 275. Not sure how that qualifies. Google it. My argument stands.

      • nothanksimdriving123 - May 3, 2012 at 12:33 PM

        racksie, there have been 25 no-hitters in MLB history that were not shutouts, including Santana’s last year, two team/combined no-hitters, and one in 1964 where the pitcher lost the game 1-0.
        1882 Guy Hecker, Louisville at Pittsburgh, AA, Sept. 19, 3-1.
        1884 Al Atkinson, Philadelphia vs Pittsburgh, AA, May 24, 10-1.
        1884 Dick Burns, Cincinnati at Kansas City, UA, Aug. 26, 3-1.
        1886 Al Atkinson, Philadelphia vs New York, AA, May 1, 3-2.
        1888 Ed Seward, Philadelphia vs Cincinnati, AA, July 26, 12-2.
        1892 Alex Sanders, Louisville vs Baltimore, NL, Aug. 22, 6-2.
        1892 Charles “Bumpus” Jones, Cincinnati vs Pittsburgh, NL, Oct. 15, 7-1 .
        1899 Victor Willis, Boston vs Washington, NL, Aug. 7, 7-1.
        1907 Nick Maddox, Pittsburgh vs Brooklyn, NL, Sept. 20, 2-1.
        1908 Bob Rhoades, Cleveland vs Boston, AL, Sept. 18, 2-1.
        1912 Earl Hamilton, St. Louis at Detroit, AL, Aug. 30, 5-1.
        1914 Joe Benz, Chicago vs Cleveland, AL, May 31, 6-1.
        1914 Ed LaFitte, Brooklyn vs Kansas City, FL, Sept. 19, 6-2.
        1917 George Mogridge, New York at Boston, AL, April 24, 2-1.
        1925 Arthur “Dazzy” Vance, Brooklyn vs Philadelphia, NL, Sept. 13. 10-1.
        1951 Bob Feller, Cleveland vs Detroit, AL, July 1, 2-1 .
        1963 Don Nottebart, Houston vs Philadelphia, NL, May 17, 4-1.
        1964 Ken Johnson, Houston vs Cincinnati, NL, April 23, 0-1.
        1967 Baltimore vs Detroit, AL, April 30, 1-2 (Steve Barber-8 2/3, Stu Miller-1/3; combined to walk 10, giving up 2 runs in 9th).
        1967 Dean Chance, Minnesota at Cleveland, AL, Aug. 25, 2-1.
        1968 George Culver, Cincinnati at Philadelphia, NL, July 29, 6-1.
        1976 Chicago at Oakland, AL, July 28, 2-1 (John Odom-5, Francisco Barrios-4; pair walked 11 batters).
        1986 Joe Cowley, Chicago at California, AL, Sept. 19, 7-1.
        1993 Darryl Kile, Houston vs. New York, NL, Sept. 8, 7-1.
        2011 Ervin Santana, Anaheim at Cleveland, AL, July 27, 3-1.

      • racksie - May 3, 2012 at 12:45 PM

        So 25 out of 275 validates the no-no argument? Hardly. Argument, and reality, still stands. Awesome list though. And really interesting,

      • monkeyjuice313 - May 3, 2012 at 1:23 PM

        No day is complete without a Dick Burns reference.

      • nothanksimdriving123 - May 3, 2012 at 1:38 PM

        Actually racksie, I was not making an argument one way or another, just offering some history. First time I recall hearing a no-hitter referred to as a no-no was in 1970 when Bill Singer pitched one. In the moments after it, Vin Scully told us that Singer’s teammates called him Billy No-no because “when he runs he shakes his head from side to side” so it was a no-no for Billy No-no. Just history. No argument.
        Argument: a perfecto is no runs, no hits, no walks, no errors, no hit batsmen, no passed balls on strike 3, no catcher’s interference, no fan or fielder’s obstruction/interference, etc. So that would make it a no-no-no-no-no-no-no….

      • davidpom50 - May 3, 2012 at 2:40 PM

        There was also a game a few years ago the Dodgers won 1-0 against the Angels in which the Dodgers did not get a hit, but it doesn’t count because it was at Dodger Stadium, so the Angels only pitched 8 innings.

  4. Jonny 5 - May 3, 2012 at 11:21 AM

    Weaver would instantly become my favorite player if he peed on the mound to mark his territory. A big wet J.W.

    • WhenMattStairsIsKing - May 3, 2012 at 12:18 PM

      He would then become a RELIEF pitcher, wouldn’t he?

      • Jonny 5 - May 3, 2012 at 1:14 PM


      • monkeyjuice313 - May 3, 2012 at 1:24 PM


    • SmackSaw - May 3, 2012 at 1:19 PM

      I think every pitcher should pee on the mound. Let’s take it further. When somebody steals a base, pee on it. Guys that hit home runs pee on the plate. 1st and 3rd base coaches pee in their box before the game starts. Managers arguing calls pee where the ump stood where he made the call. Umps pee in the respective dugout of the manager or player carping about his calls…

  5. hushbrother - May 3, 2012 at 11:23 AM

    Uta Pippig is unimpressed.

  6. bigleagues - May 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM

    Wait . . . humanoid pitchers pee?

  7. ltzep75 - May 3, 2012 at 2:29 PM

    His piss wasn’t very overpowering, but it got the job done.

  8. charlutes - May 3, 2012 at 2:41 PM

    Nor would anyone make a story on it

  9. drewsylvania - May 3, 2012 at 4:20 PM

    Pretty sure Weaver’s high strikes were picked up by AWACS.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. C. Hamels (5493)
  2. C. Gomez (4237)
  3. T. Tulowitzki (4187)
  4. M. Trout (3802)
  5. J. Cueto (3746)
  1. A. Rodriguez (3509)
  2. C. Gonzalez (3506)
  3. D. Price (3270)
  4. T. Clippard (3068)
  5. J. Reyes (2746)