Skip to content

MLB denies Mets’ appeal for R.A. Dickey no-hitter

Jun 15, 2012, 3:45 PM EST

New York Mets v Washington Nationals Getty Images

As expected, MLB has denied the Mets’ appeal that R.A. Dickey‘s one-hitter Wednesday be changed to a no-hitter after the fact.

They asked the league to consider changing B.J. Upton‘s first-inning infield hit, which proved to be the Rays’ only one off Dickey, into an error on third baseman David Wright.

Dickey himself said the idea of overruling the original call to give him a no-hitter “would be weird” and “would be a little bit cheap.” He also correctly noted that the entire scope of the game and the amount of pressure on him would have changed, making an after-the-fact switch problematic on several levels.

And apparently MLB agreed. Or maybe they just thought Upton’s hit was actually a hit. Either way Dickey officially threw a one-hitter, improving to 10-1 with a 2.20 ERA, and Johan Santana‘s no-hitter two weeks ago remains the only one in Mets history.

  1. ajcardsfan - Jun 15, 2012 at 4:00 PM

    Just to troll the Mets fans:
    If they had ruled in favor of the Mets, that would have meant the Mets had two no-hitters with Asterisks

  2. ratflop - Jun 15, 2012 at 4:10 PM

    Clown move, Mets. R.A. Dickey seemed almost embarrassed that the Mets were doing this. I can understand of it was a blatantly bad call, but it most certainly wasn’t. As well, Dickey pitched the rest of the game knowing a no-hitter wasn’t on the line. No wonder R.A. said it “would be a little cheap” – good on him for not buying into this.

  3. mybrunoblog - Jun 15, 2012 at 4:11 PM

    Move on please. Nothing to see here…..

  4. rooney24 - Jun 15, 2012 at 4:12 PM

    I’m glad they did not change it. Now, I hope Dickey goes out and throws a no-hitter for real. I’m not a Mets fan, but it is tough to not root for Dickey. He seems like one of the most level-headed players.

  5. shaggylocks - Jun 15, 2012 at 4:22 PM

    I must not have been paying super close attention to this story earlier, because I only just noticed that Dickey was pitching against the Rays. The Rays have got to hold some sort of record for getting no-hit against while being at or near the top of their division. It’s an odd thing to happen to such a good team. I’m glad MLB let Upton’s hit stand, but it would have been interesting to add that game to the Rays’ “solid team, hitless game” statistic.

  6. stlouis1baseball - Jun 15, 2012 at 4:35 PM

    Serious question (completely off topic) that I have been curious about recently.
    When did we stop using the term “good for him” and/or “good for her” and replace it with…
    “good on him” and/or “good on her?” This is a very recent thing and something that is happening all the time.

    • ratflop - Jun 15, 2012 at 4:51 PM

      I’ve always associated the difference as good FOR him/her as being an action that the person did not initiate but benefited that same person, whereas good ON him/her as being an action that the person did initiate to the benefit of that same person.

      Wow, I think I need to find something to do right now…….

      • stlouis1baseball - Jun 15, 2012 at 5:01 PM

        Hahaha! I hear you Ratflop. But I was serious. Personally, I only recently have noticed people using the term “good on him” or “good on her.” Whereas, I have always heard the terms “good for him” or “good for her.”
        Don’t let it bother you. I also don’t like it when people use the word “bump” when describing the pitchers mound. “On the hill”…perfect. “On the bump”…rediculous.

  7. sdelmonte - Jun 15, 2012 at 4:46 PM

    There is no truth to the rumor that Torre told the Mets that they’re lucky he didn’t declare Wright’s ninth inning error a hit as well.

  8. bleed4philly - Jun 15, 2012 at 5:50 PM

    Karma for santana’s no-no

  9. leftywildcat - Jun 16, 2012 at 10:19 AM

    Dickey’s right in this case about the pressure, but isn’t this another argument for instant replay? Let the official scorer see the tapes, not just the “ump in the booth”. There’s no sense in correcting most of a problem when even more can be corrected at the same time.

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. W. Myers (2133)
  2. J. Kang (2027)
  3. D. Ross (1907)
  4. M. Scutaro (1817)
  5. J. Shields (1815)
  1. D. Haren (1785)
  2. C. Gonzalez (1783)
  3. T. Tulowitzki (1706)
  4. J. Grilli (1680)
  5. C. Hamels (1532)