A recent Boston-Tampa Bay gamewent into 16 innings and used 15 pitchers between the two teams, even though both starters went 8 innings. I know that in some cases teams have put position players on the mound. Maybe you can’t run out of pitchers and as long as you have bench players you are required to put some-one up there. Except that an extra innings game usually uses a lot of pinch hitters, pinch runners, and other substitutes, so there might not even be anyone left dressed on the bench if the game goes on for long enough.
Is there a rule that describes what happens if it’s an extra-inning game when one team runs out of pitchers with the score tied?
At that point, I think you’re stuck, or forfeit. I’d just start rotating players onto the mound, let the pitcher take up a fielding position, and that position player now gets to pitch.
Looks like there are a few rules around when a pitcher can take up a position instead of leaving the game, but it can clearly be done.
Although, once you start having position players pitching, the game isn’t going to last very long.
Well maybe you tap the next day’s starter or mostly the last guy in is stuck until he becomes ineffective and the other team scores.
You can have a position player, including one already in the game pitch, but usually that’s more for blow outs than extra-extra innings.
And if there isn’t anyone left at all, you keep playing with those 9, so your former pitcher just moved to right field so the right fielder can pitch.
Well, if it gets to the point where a team can no longer field 9 players, they forfeit. However, I assume the umpires would suspend the game if it got way out of hand. That is done completely at their discretion.
I watched a Cards-Mets game last season that went into the 20th inning. The Cardinals started using position players to pitch (an infielder pitched one inning and an outfielder 2 more) once they ran out of relievers, while the Mets put in another starter. Eventually the Mets won, since the position players were not exactly effective on the mound.
Phillies utility infielder Wilson Valdez actually won a game this year by pitching a scoreless 19th inning after the bullpen was empty. He’d started the game playing at 2nd. Valdez said he was ready to go two or three more innings if necessary. So, it happens.
There was also a long postseason game between the Mets and Astros in '86 where Davey Johnson had his last 2 relievers (Roger McDowell & Jesse Orosco) alternate between pitching and playing in the outfield. If memory serves correctly, he also kept swapping their corner outfield positions based on each batter’s tendencies.
No, that was a regular season game between the Mets and Cincinnati, on July 22, 1986. The problem in that game, actually, was that the Mets ran out of position players after several players were ejected in a brawl.
The scenario of position players pitching is much less likely in the postseason, because (given the imperative of winning, and extra off days) off-duty starters are more likely to be pressed into service. During the regular season, a manager may feel that sacrificing one game (via a position player pitching) is better than risking injury by pitching an off-duty starter.
Except that it isn’t alawys a sacrifice, because sometimes position players can be surprisingly effective. On the other hand, position players pitching are also at risk of injury (see Jose Canseco).
What does it mean to “run out of” pitchers? When there’s 1 pitcher left, can you just leave him on the mound for the rest of the game? I remember the All-Star game ran out of pitchers a few years ago making Selig turn it into something the “matters” by giving the winning league home field advantage in the World Series, but can’t they just keep the last pitcher on the mound or use someone who’s not a pitcher to throw?
The first part is certainly true–a rule, in fact. But given that games can and do go on after every pitcher has pitched, what would constitute being “out of hand”? Has any game ever been suspended on (effectively) the grounds that the managers have burned their players too quickly?
I could conceive a situation where the game gets down to 9 players on one side, and one player gets injured. But instead of forfeiting, they decide to keep a guy with half a bat sticking out of his chest writhing on the ground in right field. Incredibly unlikely, but probably a situation the umps would intervene.
They would do no such thing. If a team is down to its last nine players, and loses a player due to injury or ejection, they will forfeit, pure and simple.
This has never happened, and probably never will happen, because off-duty starters form a reservoir of unused players that can plug gaps in all except the most extraordinary circumstances. But if it ever does happen, baseball will follow its own rules.
While it’s true that the rules allow the umpires to “call” a game for unspecified reasons, in general they won’t do it just because a team has run out of players. Something like this did happen in the 2002 All Star Game, when both teams ran out of players after the eleventh inning (sort of). Commissioner Selig decided that the game should be allowed to end in a tie. One reason this went to the commissioner is that this is a decision that umpires don’t normally make. The commissioner could have decided that both teams would continue to play until there was a winner. That the All Star game was merely an exhibition with nothing at stake other than bragging rights contributed to Selig’s decision to end the game.
The rules allow a team to replace a player with one who hasn’t been used in that game. Once a team has used up its bench players, the ones left in the line-up will have to complete the game. From this point on, there are a few things that could cause the team to be unable to field a full set of players: injury, ejection, a manager mistakenly visiting the mound twice. . . Any of these would lead to forfeit. Another possibility, if the manager is afraid of injuring a pitcher through overuse, would be to forfeit by pulling the team off the field.
They wouldn’t directly forfeit, but would just let some scrub backup infielder who used to pitch in high school handle the remaining pitching duties. Once you get a pitcher with severely limited skills throwing, the other team is going to score. You at least have a fighting chance to win, since your guys will be batting against their bottom of the barrel pitcher too.
“Running out of pitchers” really means that you have used all of the pitchers that were considered “available” to pitch in that day’s game. Managers have a strategy for their pitching staff, that incorporates the idea that they have to play 6 days a week for 6 months. That strategy does not generally make allowances for a 16 inning game, so you can use all of your available guys and still need to put someone else on the mound.
It may be of interest to look at some of the very rare games where teams have used every player on their roster, and were vulnerable to forfeit if losing an additional player to injury or ejection.
One such game occurred on August 15, 2006, when Cubs manager Dusty Baker exhausted his roster in an 18-inning game. Among the Cubs off-duty starters, Angel Guzman and Rich Hill were pressed into service as emergency relievers, and Carlos Zambrano and Carlos Marmol (then a rookie starting pitcher, and a surprisingly decent hitter) were burned as pinch-hitters. The Cubs played the last inning and a half at risk of forfeit (as was well understood and remarked upon at the time), but won the game.
On August 17-18, 1982, Tom Lasorda exhausted his roster while managing the Dodgers in a 21-inning game against the Cubs. This was before lights at wrigley Field, so the game was suspended because of darkness and resumed the next day. This allowed the next day’s starter, Jerry Reuss, to slide into the game as a reliever. Then Ron Cey was ejected, and the Dodgers had no position players left, so Fernando Valenzuela and Bob Welch were pressed into service as outfielders. This was in the days of a four-man rotation, so that was it. Another injury or ejection would have = forfeit. But the Dodgers stayed healthy and won.
The prize for true substitution diarrhea goes to Dick Williams, who exhausted an expanded 30-man September roster for the Oakland A’s on September 19, 1972. He burned two off-duty starters as pinch-hitters and one as a pinch-runner, ran through six second-basemen, and was bench-less at the end of the game, which the A’s lost.
These games happened to come to my attention because they involved Chicago teams. No doubt there have been others. But, they are very rare.
Indeed they would do such a thing, and have. Play has been suspended, not specifically because teams ran out of pitchers, but either because of a curfew or, in the case of this AAA game, the onset of delirious exhaustion sometime after 4 AM.
Exactly. Certainly, games can be suspended by curfew–there is no discretion involved. And games can be suspended if the umpires deem that the field or the weather conditions have become unplayable, which sounds like it would have been a reasonable ruling in the Pawtucket game. But as for a game being suspended because a team is running out of players–at the major league level, it ain’t gonna happen.