Official Scoring Questions for Stew

[stewthornley]

John is right.  I'll have a new article done after this homestand.  I think I've responded to most of the questions on this forum, but there was one about an infielder missing a pop up with the infield fly rule called and how I annotate it.

 

When the IFF rule is called and the ball is caught, as it usually is, I put in the usual P4 or P6 (whatever) and add I.F.  If it dropped, I'd probably write in something, such as IF dropped.  If a runner advance when the ball got away, it would probably be an error for the advancement.  If that happened, I'd call Elias Sports Bureau to confirm, but giving the player the put out for the infield fly and then adding an advancement error for letting the ball get away would seem reasonable.

[rghrbek]

Stew,

Were you able to see the bunt single awarded to Joe Mauer on Tuesday night at home vs. the White Sox? What were your impressions?

 

I thought that should have been an error.  

[spinowner]

I'd like to revisit the infield shift issue that was previously discussed. (Or I suppose it could be thought of as beating a dead horse.)
Hypothetical situation: extra inning game, no non-pitchers available. A player has to leave the game due to injury so the manager brings a pitcher in to play the outfield. A left handed batter (not Joe Mauer) is at the plate so the manager positions the pitcher in left field to minimize the likelihood that he'll have to make a play. The next batter is right handed so the manager shifts the pitcher to right field. Would the box score show that the pitcher (and the other corner outfielder) played both left field and right field? My assumption is that the answer is yes.
So my obvious question is: why that would be dealt with differently than a third baseman and a shortstop switching positions?

[notoriousgod71]

The ball hit right to Polanco that even hit his glove? Hit?

[notoriousgod71]

There is no way that should be a triple for Kepler.

 

If Smith does even nothing but stand in one spot it's a single.

[stewthornley]

Hi gang - I've been lazy, but I will get something new on the blog soon - Frazier's run-scoring triple play gives me some material.  Sorry I haven't responded, but I looked at some of the recent questions.  The only play I remember regarding these questions is the squibber (not a bunt) by Mauer.  I wasn't the official scorer that night.  The OS called it a hit and later changed it to an error on the pitcher.  I thought it was a 50-50.  The pitcher should have made that play.  He should have been able to field the ball cleanly with time to go to first for the out.  However, what he appeared to be doing was making a glove-flip to the first baseman.  Not real wise, and it didn't work.  However, that's what he decided to do.  Normally, I wouldn't give an error for a botched glove flip.  This doesn't fit totally into the "normally" category because he shouldn't have tried it.  But sometimes we have to go with what a fielder decides to do, unless it's really blatant.  That's why I say it's a 50-50, could have gone either way.

 

Send some more questions, and I'll try to be more diligent about checking this and responding.  By the way, when it's just venting with a series of "Why the fruck wasn't that an error?", I probably won't respond.  But go ahead with it anyway.

 

Thanks.  Stew

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Double switch / reentry Tuesday night.

 

Your thoughts. 

[yarnivek1972]

Here's one. Margot was awarded an RBI and a sacrifice fly on a play in which another baserunner was thrown out. I thought there was no RBI on double plays.

[spinowner]

 

Here's one. Margot was awarded an RBI and a sacrifice fly on a play in which another baserunner was thrown out. I thought there was no RBI on double plays.

I'm not an official scorer but I'm going to guess that in this case the second out of the double play occurred after the run scored and was not a force out. In cases where both outs of a double play are force outs there's no RBI.

[zenser]

Last night with Castro on first in the 3rd, Barrios bunts.  Myers charges and makes an errant throw to second which, to me, the runner would have been safe regardless.  Could it have been ruled a sacrifice with an E-3 allowing the runners to advance instead of an E-3, thus charging Barrios with an bat?  To me, Barrios was giving himself up and did his job.

[steve]

 

Last night with Castro on first in the 3rd, Barrios bunts.  Myers charges and makes an errant throw to second which, to me, the runner would have been safe regardless.  Could it have been ruled a sacrifice with an E-3 allowing the runners to advance instead of an E-3, thus charging Barrios with an bat?  To me, Barrios was giving himself up and did his job.

 

Was wondering about this one at the time. Barrios, clearly was attempting to sacrifice. However, a brief perusal of the internets seems to show that a SAC cannot be scored unless the batter actually sacrifices himself, ie is out. Because Barrios was safe at first, no SAC.

 

Is this correct?

[yarnivek1972]

Was wondering about this one at the time. Barrios, clearly was attempting to sacrifice. However, a brief perusal of the internets seems to show that a SAC cannot be scored unless the batter actually sacrifices himself, ie is out. Because Barrios was safe at first, no SAC.

 

Is this correct?

I know that isn't correct. Hitters can get credit for a sacrifice (and thus no at bat) on an error. My guess in this case is that in the judgement of the official scorer, a good throw would have gotten Castro out. Hence, a failed sacrifice and a charged time at bat.

 

The general rule of thumb with errors is to try to piece together what would have happened if there was no error. In a batter reaching on an error on a sacrifice, without the error a successful sacrifice would take place. In the Berrios case, no error would have meant an unsuccessful sacrifice - at least in the scorers' judgement. I remember the play. My recollection is that a good throw results in an out. But I wouldn't swear by that recollection.

[stewthornley]

Good questions from the San Diego series.  (I didn't see the double-switch that got asked about.  What happened?)

 

Regarding Myers's throw to second on Berrios's bunt, I also wondered how that would be scored.  Had the runner beaten the throw, then it would be a fielder's choice with a sacrifice for Berrios.  From the replay, it looked like a good throw would have had the runner beat, so it was an error on Myers for failure to get the out at second.  In that case, no sacrifice for Berrios.  

 

On the sacrifice fly with an RBI, the way a batter can't get an RBI on a double play is if he grounds into a force or reverse-force double play and is charged with a grounded into double play (GIDP).  As it happens, I just wrote about this in what John has dubbed "The Stew Review" after Todd Frazier grounded into a triple play. 

 

A standard 643 double play - force at second, batter out at first - is a GIDP.  So is a 3-6 reverse force - batter out with a throw to second to tag the runner coming in from first.  No RBI on first.  But a batter can get an RBI on other kinds of double plays, including ground balls that turn into two outs but don't have two force outs or a reverse-force.

 

In the sacrifice fly in the Twins game, the third out was made on a tag play, with the runner from second trying to go to third.  This is a time play (not a timing play, the umpires tell me; they use the term time play).  The run crossed before the third out.  Since the third out wasn't a force, the run counts and the batter gets an RBI.

 

Here is more of a playing than scoring rules question.  What if the runner from second had been doubled off the base rather than tagged out after tagging and trying to advance?  Could a run score on that if the runner crossed the plate before the third out?  Yes, although this is confusing to a lot of folks, including players and managers.  Getting doubled off a base isn't a force, even though it has the same element as a force in that the runner doesn't have to be tagged.  In 2010 the Twins lost a run by not knowing this.  Punto on third, Span on second with one out and a long fly to center.  Punto tagged, Span took off.  The ball was caught, and Span was going to be doubled off for the third out.  What Punto needed to do was beat cheeks to the plate to cross before the third out.  However, he was more focused on waving at Span to get back.  He then jogged toward the plate because he thought it wouldn't matter since he thought his run couldn't count if Span was doubled off.  There was a lot in the game story the next day about how no one realized that this was still a time play and that Punto's run would have counted had he gotten home before they doubled Span off second.  And then the next year the same thing happened with Alexi Casilla.

 

Always pays to know the rules.

[zenser]

Thanks for the answers!  Great info!

[spinowner]

Bottom 6 on Aug. 4, Dozier awarded a hit when the throw from 3rd bounced and the 1B didn't handle the hop, but the replay showed Dozier was 6 feet away from the base when the ball arrived. Why isn't that an error?

[Old Twins Cap]

Because, .... home field advantage, in that the Official Scorer favors rulings that help Twins hitters and pitchers, as much as possible.

[stewthornley]

Old Twins Cap: No

[stewthornley]

spinowner: Regarding bottom of the sixth August 4 - that was my call.  I went with hit based on the difficulty of the throw.  Beltre made a nice backhand of a tricky hop.  He was playing the grounder defensively, which can indictate he's having trouble with it.  That doesn't mean he can't be charged with an error on the throw that followed (two parts to the play).  He did pound the glove before the throw, which is a sign he's set, but he still didn't appear to be in a good position - feet not lined up directly toward first - and he threw a bit across the body from a low arm slot.  He often throws from a low arm slot, so that could be ordinary effort for him.  But I thought with a throw from that distance, I'd like to see him a little more set in the right alignment to consider it ordinary effort.  Judgement call, and I went with hit.  Thanks for asking.  Good question.

[USAFChief]

spinowner: Regarding bottom of the sixth August 4 - that was my call.  I went with hit based on the difficulty of the throw.  Beltre made a nice backhand of a tricky hop.  He was playing the grounder defensively, which can indictate he's having trouble with it.  That doesn't mean he can't be charged with an error on the throw that followed (two parts to the play).  He did pound the glove before the throw, which is a sign he's set, but he still didn't appear to be in a good position - feet not lined up directly toward first - and he threw a bit across the body from a low arm slot.  He often throws from a low arm slot, so that could be ordinary effort for him.  But I thought with a throw from that distance, I'd like to see him a little more set in the right alignment to consider it ordinary effort.  Judgement call, and I went with hit.  Thanks for asking.  Good question.

Stew...with all due respect...for me this answer sort of epitomizes why many of us have lost respect for what MLB wants from official scorers.

 

Because you essentially just said "that's a throw he should make, but he didn't."

 

That's an error.

[The_Phantom]

Here's a non-twins question for you: In the Dodgers' game last night, Hill lost a perfect game in the 9th on a Forsythe error. The ball was hit sort of right at him, but took a terrible hop at the last second and hit him in the upper chest and popped up into the air and far enough away that a play was impossible. How often is that scored a hit vs an error? Seemed borderline to me, but they're obviously going to give a guy with a no hitter going the benefit of the doubt

 

[spinowner]

Top 5, Tuesday night. Tim Anderson hits a ball to right. He slides into second base as the throw comes in. He touches second base without being tagged, then overslides and is tagged out. The hit was ruled a single but to me there is no doubt--NONE--that he should be credited with a double because he reached second base safely. I challenge you, Stew, to explain the wrong call that this was a single.

[ashbury]

OK, this isn't really a scorer's decision, just a question about "why are the rules like that?" But maybe it's come up in discussions among your peers.

 

When the defense commits an error, the inning is reconstructed by the scorer to determine earned runs. When there's defensive indifference, not so much. Last night Matt Belisle gave up a meaningless earned run in the ninth. With two out, a batter walked, who then took second on defensive indifference. A single scored him, and then the last batter struck out. If the inning had proceeded more normally, it's reasonable to assume the game would have ended with runners on first and third. No way that runner "earned" his run, so why should the pitcher have it hung on him? It's a matter of what the defense did, moreso than the pitching - why are the cases not treated similarly by rule?

[ashbury]

Top 5, Tuesday night. Tim Anderson hits a ball to right. He slides into second base as the throw comes in. He touches second base without being tagged, then overslides and is tagged out. The hit was ruled a single but to me there is no doubt--NONE--that he should be credited with a double because he reached second base safely. I challenge you, Stew, to explain the wrong call that this was a single.

I'll be presumptuous and offer this rule as the reason:

 

9.06 Determining Value of Base Hits

c: When the batter attempts to make a two-base hit or a three-base hit by sliding, he must hold the last base to which he advances. If a batter-runner overslides and is tagged out before getting back to the base safely, he shall be credited with only as many bases as he attained safely. If a batter-runner overslides second base and is tagged out, the official scorer shall credited him with a one-base hit; if the batter-runner overslides third base and is tagged out, the official scorer shall credit him with a two-base hit.

 

No latitude there.

[Ryan Atkins]

"If a batter-runner overslides second base and is tagged out, the official scorer shall credited him with a one-base hit"

 

Interesting. So, if the runner overslides second base, realizes it, and is somehow able to avoid the initial tag attempt, get to his feet and start running toward 3rd base and is finally tagged out at 3rd base. Single.

 

Or, while trying to get to 3rd base, an overthrow of some sort occurs, and the runner attempts to score but is thrown out at home. Single? Keeping in mind that, strictly speaking, "the batter attempted to make a two-base hit by sliding".

 

Baseball has the best rules!

Having fun folks! If you are inclined to take this post uber seriously, please just ignore it.

[spinowner]

 

I'll be presumptuous and offer this rule as the reason:

 

9.06 Determining Value of Base Hits

c: When the batter attempts to make a two-base hit or a three-base hit by sliding, he must hold the last base to which he advances. If a batter-runner overslides and is tagged out before getting back to the base safely, he shall be credited with only as many bases as he attained safely. If a batter-runner overslides second base and is tagged out, the official scorer shall credited him with a one-base hit; if the batter-runner overslides third base and is tagged out, the official scorer shall credit him with a two-base hit.

 

No latitude there.

I think the rule should be changed, but obviously this is of very little consequence as it doesn't have any effect on the outcome of a game. I just think if you touch a base and overslide you still should get credit for reaching the base.

[Sarah]

I was also at Tuesday's game and two people have asked me about that play since then so apparently it's not a well understood rule...but it's the rule nonetheless. And it also reminds me that it's great that it is September and people are still paying attention to the Twins.