Skip to content

The Mets are appealing a scoring decision to try to get R.A. Dickey a no-hitter. They will lose.

Jun 14, 2012, 9:19 AM EDT

Lost in the Matt Cain perfect game drama last night was the fact that R.A. Dickey nearly threw a no-hitter of his own. The only blemish: a first inning infield single by B.J. Upton. It was a slow-rolling grounder that Wright tried to barehand and couldn’t.  The Mets, however, are trying to get that single changed to an error via an appeal of the scoring decision.

This seems doomed to failure.  Click the pic to watch the play:

source:

I think that’s called a hit almost every single time.

This is not unprecedented, by the way. Reader Jess Lemont reminds me that in 2008, the Brewers appealed a scorer’s decision to give Pirates third baseman Andy LaRoche a hit in a CC Sabathia one-hitter. There, as here, the call came when the fielder — who was actually Sabathia —  failed to pick up a ball on a barehand attempt.  Here was the text of the ruling from MLB:

“The committee held an extensive and constructive decision after viewing footage of the play in question and considered the documentation presented by the Brewers. It was the collective decision of the committee that the judgment of the scorer was not ‘clearly erroneous,’ which is the standard set forth in Official Scoring Rule 10.01(a), and thus did not meet the criteria for League reversal of the call made by Official Scorer Bob Webb.”

“Clearly erroneous” is a high standard to meet and there is no way that the call on Wright’s play was that. It’s often called a hit. Most of the time, I’d guess, with the scorer’s reasoning presumably being that if the fielder had to go with a barehand play in order to make it, it was damn close to begin with.

So it’s great that the Mets are sticking up for their guy, but in this case I don’t think it’s going to be successful.

Oh, and a final note: I don’t think some of the “oh isn’t it rich that the Mets are doing this given the bad call that gave Johan Santana his no-no” comments I’ve seen on Twitter since last night are particularly on point. There’s a difference in my view between a judgment call by a scorer and a missed call by an ump. Scorer’s decisions do get overturned quite often and, to be honest, are more often wrong than the umps on the field are.

The upshot: the Mets aren’t hypocrites for doing this. They’re just not going to be successful.

  1. RedHeadedBastard - Jun 14, 2012 at 9:25 AM

    Are only the Official Scorer’s mistakes reviewable and reversible? Are Umps exempt from this?

    • delawarephilliesfan - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:07 AM

      I believe that is correct, I think the only time you can over rule the ump is if they mis-applied the rules. Not to mention, if you do over rule the ump, the game has to be resumed from that point (see George Brett Pine Tar incident)

      • deadeyedesign23 - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:19 AM

        Yeah if we went back and reviewed the hit in Johan’s game are we gonna be like “Ok back to the 6th inning, Beltran you’re on second…okie doke let’s play ball.”

      • nothanksimdriving123 - Jun 14, 2012 at 2:12 PM

        It is a debatable ruling, BUT, giving Dickey a no-hitter after the fact due to the change of a ruling from the first inning would be absurd, since there is no way to determine if he would have kept it going had it been alive later in the game. You cannot assume all the other at-bats and pitch choices and other variables would have been the same, and that he would have handled the pressure of the late innings the very same way. Silly. It would be as * as Santana’s official no-no.

    • chumthumper - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

      If this isn’t Exhibit A for instant replay on an Official Scorer’s thought process and decision, I don’t know what is.

      • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Jun 14, 2012 at 1:15 PM

        it was the first inning. it was not a significant decision at the time. Only in hindsight did that take on some significance.

  2. aceshigh11 - Jun 14, 2012 at 9:30 AM

    So, Craig, if you were speaking directly to the Mets, you would say this to them?

  3. Joe - Jun 14, 2012 at 9:35 AM

    Last night in the Boston/Miami game Adrian Gonzalez hit a sinking liner to left field, which Donovan Solano easily reached while running in. The ball clanged off his glove. Base hit. Later somebody (can’t remember who) hit a bouncer about one foot to the left of Hanley Ramirez. Ramirez gave it the old “ole,” never touching a ball that was basically hit right at him. Base hit. Remy and Orsillo justified that one as a bad hop, and it was, but that problem would have been mitigated had Ramirez taken two steps to his left and gotten in front of the ball.

    So yeah, based on the comparables, the play in the video above is a hit, no question.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jun 14, 2012 at 9:43 AM

      Ramirez gave it the old “ole,” never touching a ball that was basically hit right at him.

      C’mon … get in front of the damn ball. Don’t give me this *ole* bullshit.
      Hey, I took one in the eye last year, I’m not about to lose my sight
      I’m deeply moved, every time you play one off your hips, you owe me 40 situps.

      • RedHeadedBastard - Jun 14, 2012 at 9:49 AM

        Yo, bartender, Jobu needs a refill.

      • deadeyedesign23 - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:23 AM

        Next time you tank a groundball I’ll cut your nuts off and stuff em down your fuckin throat.

  4. flyerscup2010 - Jun 14, 2012 at 9:46 AM

    poor david wright

  5. number42is1 - Jun 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

    SPEAKING OF Twitter… do we get “you asked..” today?

  6. sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:04 AM

    As you say, good for the Mets for sticking up for their guy. If MLB did’t reverse Jim Joyce on Gallaraga’s perfect game, they are not going to overturn this.

    Really, I think this call could have gone either way. I am sure of the exact same play happened in the 7th of 8th it would have been ruled an error. Unfortunately for Dickey, nobody could have known in the first inning that this play would attain such significance.

    It’s not the first time a sloppy barehanded play has left Dickey short his ultimate goal, and it probably won’t be the last.

    • Francisco (FC) - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:27 AM

      sloppy barehanded play has left Dickey short his ultimate goal

      I see what you did there.

  7. delawarephilliesfan - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:10 AM

    The Mets may not be “hypocrites” in the technical sense of the word, put they have a ton of gall!

    The Cardinals knew perfectlly well they were not no hit – but they shut up and moved on. Dickey threw a fantastic game – shut up and move, Mets.

    • dan1111 - Jun 14, 2012 at 6:37 PM

      For the team on the receiving end, there is little difference between being no-hit and being one-hit. Why would they care? But for the pitcher, a no-hitter may be the crowning achievement of his career. So you can’t really compare the two.

      And why assume that the Mets are doing this out of selfishness? More likely, they are doing it as a nice gesture of support for one of their players.

      • delawarephilliesfan - Jun 15, 2012 at 2:20 PM

        Teams don’t care if they are no-hit vs. 1 hit? Surely you are joking. Teams very much care if they are no-hit – the Phillies were last no hit in 1978, and there was controversy on a ball hit in the 8th inning that was ruled an error. Ask any player from that 1978 Phillies and they will gladly tell you why they were robbed. Players care about being no-hit, and one hit = not a no-hitter

        As for this case – again, reasonable people can disagree, and I do of course see the notion of backing up your player, i.e. protest on his behalf as a gesture. But days earlier a mistake gave the Mets a no hitter, so to turn around now and ask for a reversal is chutzpah!

        Either what is called on the field stands or it doesn’t. Which is it that the Mets believe?

  8. antelope850 - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:18 AM

    My issue with calling it a hit is that Wright didn’t need to barehand it. The way that ball was hit, and where he was when he reached it .. he should have just gloved it. I get that the runner is BJ Upton and maybe he beats it out. But stabbing at that ball barehanded was extremely unlikely (even though I’ve seen Wright make that play barehanded before.)

    • dan1111 - Jun 14, 2012 at 6:45 PM

      “the runner is BJ Upton and maybe he beats it out.” In other words, even if Wright had cleanly fielded the ball and made a good throw, it was not certain to be an out. Sounds like a hit to me.

      • A.J. - Jun 14, 2012 at 7:52 PM

        That play is a hit every day of the week in every stadium.

        Failing to make an “extraordinary play” (which I believe is the language in the rules) is not an error. Having to barehand a ball to get a fast runner is an extraordinary play. Yes people make the play often in the majors, because they are major leaguers, by definition pretty extraordinary, but if you don’t have time to play a ball with your glove, not picking it up cleanly on the run with your barehand is not an error.

  9. jericoc - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:38 AM

    The Mets are wrong (even if just paying lip service) in submitting the appeal, but the truth is, that play is an error. Official scorers no longer saddle players with errors based on their own poor judgment or ineptitude, but that was a play that has to be made in the Majors. Eric Byrnes was going crazy on MLB Network last night about the play; saying that Wright was wrong in bare-handing it and turning it into a more difficult play …

  10. dowhatifeellike - Jun 14, 2012 at 10:43 AM

    Base hit all the way. It was Upton’s speed that caused Wright to take that risk. Barehanding that ball was the only way to get the out. The error would be gloving the ball and thinking you can still beat Upton to first.

  11. bigbruce11047 - Jun 14, 2012 at 11:34 AM

    What I saw on the video replay is the third baseman trying to make a play on the ball by grabbing it barehanded. He should have gloved it and transferred the ball to his throwing hand that way. It is hard to say whether it was an error or a base hit because we didn’t see the first baseman and the runner at first base. The third baseman (Wright) should have fielded the ball cleanly and that is an ERROR in my book. Dickie should get his no-hitter!!

  12. mybrunoblog - Jun 14, 2012 at 12:18 PM

    In the unlikely event that MLB does reverse the call and it is a no hitter the following must occur.
    According to rule 18:4a of the official baseball rule book ” after the awarding of the No hitter a day after the game the members of the winning team must reassemble on the mound of the ballpark where the game took place, dogpile the no hit pitcher and act like you expected the call to be over turned all along. Said team announcers must also react with great enthusiasm and joy”

  13. mplsjoe - Jun 14, 2012 at 12:23 PM

    The Twins recently won a scoring-change appeal, which kept Josh Willingham’s hit streak alive. http://www.startribune.com/printarticle/?id=158991705

    I guess I don’t blame the Mets for trying this. But karma’s a you-know-what. When you are gifted a phony no-hitter one week, it takes some cajones to demand to be gifted another one the next week.

  14. The Rabbit - Jun 14, 2012 at 12:45 PM

    I watched this game last night. At the time, my thought was “mental error”. It’s a play I’ve seen 3rd basemen make often even with fast baserunners. Who knew it was going to be the only hit of the game?
    So, maybe we need a new scoring category that combines plays like this and the times a fielder’s choice is scored without an out recorded (another type of “mental mistake”).
    I’m thinking BF (Brain Fart) might work.

    • indaburg - Jun 14, 2012 at 1:28 PM

      I was also watching the game last night, and my initial reaction was “error.” I have also seen 3rd basemen make this play. I’m a Rays fan, and I think Dickey got a no-hitter.

  15. drewsylvania - Jun 14, 2012 at 1:20 PM

    I hear the Astros have filed a formal complaint over the series of inside pitches called strikes by home plate umpire Ted Barrett.

    /same thing

  16. hackerjay - Jun 14, 2012 at 1:57 PM

    It’s hard to tell from the gif in this post, but just from this, it sure seems like he could have gloved it. If that is the case, then it should be an error.

  17. euie48 - Jun 14, 2012 at 3:10 PM

    Another reason for the Mets to print bogus tickets?

  18. sasquash20 - Jun 14, 2012 at 4:54 PM

    The Mets are a horrible franchise and ownership. Charging for reprints of tickets and trying to get a lame no-hitter call. Give back the Santana no hitter (that had a hit against Santana called foul) and you can have this one.

  19. menentj - Jun 15, 2012 at 5:34 PM

    That was clearly an error

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Can Nationals run the playoff table?
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Jeter (3384)
  2. C. Kershaw (2393)
  3. R. Martin (2196)
  4. A. Rodriguez (1893)
  5. J. Altuve (1873)
  1. M. Trout (1731)
  2. P. Hughes (1694)
  3. D. Ortiz (1682)
  4. J. Hamilton (1679)
  5. T. d'Arnaud (1655)