Bottom of the Sixth: Explain the situation

[Chronos]

So, I’m working on a jigsaw puzzle of Norman Rockwell’s Bottom of the Sixth. For those who can’t see the image, and are unfamiliar with it, it’s a baseball game between the home Brooklyn Dodgers and the visiting Pittsburgh Pirates. It’s currently the (obviously) bottom of the sixth inning, and the sole score all game was one run by the Pirates back in the second. It’s starting to rain, and the officials are making a decision. Meanwhile, the two managers are arguing, and the Pittsburgh manager seems more pleased about the situation.

Now, obviously the umps are deciding whether to stop the game, and I think I remember something about the sixth inning being significant for that. If they stop the game, does that mean that the game is nullified, or that it will continue after the weather improves, or that it’s over, with the team in the lead winning? I’m guessing the latter, given the Pittsburgh manager’s expression… Does it matter that Pittsburgh has had more innings than Brooklyn has, or is that made irrelevant by the fact that they didn’t score in the top of the sixth? What if they had scored in the sixth? Given that the two teams are going to want different decisions, is there some fixed objective criterion the officials are supposed to use to make their decision? If not, how do they avoid accusations of bias?

[fachverwirrt]

A game is a regulation game if it is called after five innings, so Pittsburgh would win.

Note that this is the rule now. It may have been different in 1949.

[Mr_Shine]

It’s the Brooklyn manager who is happy, (note the cap), because the sun is coming out and the game is likely to continue. The Pittburgh manager is making an exaggerated show of being in cold wet weather beacuse he wants the game declared over and him victorious.

[running_coach]

Weirdly enough, there was a recent thread.

[Colibri]

@Chronos

Meanwhile, the two managers are arguing, and the Pittsburgh manager seems more pleased about the situation.

As discussed in the other thread, it’s the Brooklyn manager, with the B on his cap, who looks happy, while the Pittsburgh manager is hunched over and looks gloomy. This is because the Brooklyn manager is trying to convince everyone that the sun is going to come out momentarily so play can be resumed, while the Pittsburgh manager is pretending that they are in the middle of a deluge and it’s impossible to continue playing.

Now, obviously the umps are deciding whether to stop the game, and I think I remember something about the sixth inning being significant for that. If they stop the game, does that mean that the game is nullified, or that it will continue after the weather improves, or that it’s over, with the team in the lead winning? I’m guessing the latter, given the Pittsburgh manager’s expression… Does it matter that Pittsburgh has had more innings than Brooklyn has, or is that made irrelevant by the fact that they didn’t score in the top of the sixth? What if they had scored in the sixth?

If they stop the game at this point, after five full innings, the game is official and the score is what it was at the end of the fifth, that is 1-0 Pittsburgh.

If the home team had been ahead at the point at which the game was called (if the Dodgers had scored two runs in the bottom of the sixth, for example) then the home team would win.

If the visitors had scored their one run in the top of the sixth, though, and the home team had not scored to take the lead in the bottom of the sixth, then the game would be suspended to be resumed at a later date.

If a game is called before the fifth inning it becomes “no game” and has to be replayed in its entirety from the beginning

Given that the two teams are going to want different decisions, is there some fixed objective criterion the officials are supposed to use to make their decision? If not, how do they avoid accusations of bias?

There’s no objective criterion. It’s the umpire’s decision to make. And umpires are accused of bias all the time no matter what decision they make.

[Chronos]

Ah, I see. I misinterpreted the Brooklyn hat as being the sleeve of the manager on the right. But I see now that it’s being held by the manager on the left.

And there are certainly both rainclouds and blue sky, but I had interpreted that as being a storm coming in, not a storm leaving. The umpires wouldn’t be making a tough decision right now if the storm were leaving: At most, they’d be deciding whether to resume the game now or wait another ten minutes or so, either of which would have basically the same effect.

[Colibri]

@Chronos

And there are certainly both rainclouds and blue sky, but I had interpreted that as being a storm coming in, not a storm leaving. The umpires wouldn’t be making a tough decision right now if the storm were leaving: At most, they’d be deciding whether to resume the game now or wait another ten minutes or so, either of which would have basically the same effect.

As mentioned in the other thread, the scoreboard and right field were on the east side of Ebbets Field, the Dodger’s home park. Thunderstorms in the US most frequently move from west to east, so the storm is most likely moving in, since the sky is blue towards the east.

However, I agree that the amount of rain shown is not going to cause them to call the game in the immediate future. In fact, a few drops wouldn’t even cause them to call a rain delay. That’s a bit of dramatic license on Rockwell’s part.

[Chronos]

Well, the amount of rain shown so far isn’t enough to call the game over. But a lot of big storms start that way: A handful of big heavy raindrops, and then a minute or two later all of a sudden it’s buckets.

And it really doesn’t make sense that the managers would be trying to put on a show, because the only audience that makes sense for that is the umps, who are (rightly) completely ignoring them.

[Colibri]

Like I said, Rockwell is taking some dramatic liberties rather than going for strict accuracy.

The Dodger manager doesn’t look a lot like Burt Shotten, who was the actual manager that year (unless he lost his glasses). The Pittsburgh manager could pass for Billy Meyer, the actual manager that year, however.

In actual fact, the outcome of that game could have been critical that year since the Dodgers ended up winning the National League pennant by one game over the Cardinals (but inevitably losing the Series to the Yankees).

[Boozahol_Squid_P.I]

@Chronos

And it really doesn’t make sense that the managers would be trying to put on a show, because the only audience that makes sense for that is the umps, who are (rightly) completely ignoring them.

Sometimes a manager is putting on a show which ostensibly is for the umpires (who ignore them) but in fact is for the players or the fans. When a manager argues strikes and balls, it’s not because he thinks he’s going to change the ump’s mind; he’s getting himself thrown out of the game as a way to show support for his pitcher.

[Chronos]

And to be sure that I understand the rain rules, let me see if I can summarize:

If the rain is over quickly, or the umpires believe it will be, the game is just put on hold for a little while and resumed (or if it doesn’t go away as quickly as first thought, it might turn into one of the other situations).

If the rain sticks around too long for a rain delay, and the game has run less than five full innings, then the game is nullified. Nothing that has happened in the game thus far matters, and the game will eventually have to be replayed in its entirety some time later in the season.

If the rain sticks around too long for a rain delay, and the game is at least five full innings, and the top of the inning has been completed, and the home team is currently in the lead (hence would also be guaranteed to be leading at the end of the current inning), the game is over, with the home team winning, and the score as it stands.

If the rain sticks around too long for a delay, and the game is at least five full innings, but the above condition is not met, then if one team was ahead at the end of the fifth, the game is immediately over, and the score is whatever it was at the end of the fifth.

If the rain sticks around too long for a delay, and the game is at least five full innings, but the above condition was not met, and the game was tied at the end of the fifth inning, then the game is suspended and will be resumed sometime later in the season, starting right back up at the point where it was stopped.

Did I miss any conditions, there? I’m guessing that nobody’s particularly fond of that last situation: It might mean that you need to find some time when the field and both teams are available and go through all of the logistics, possibly just to play a single inning. I imagine that they try to arrange these for when the teams are playing each other again anyway, but it’d still be a big nuisance.

[Freddy_the_Pig]

No, Chronos, that is not quite correct. The rules are:

If the rain sticks around too long for a rain delay, and the game has run less than five full innings, then the game is nullified. Nothing that has happened in the game thus far matters, and the game will eventually have to be replayed in its entirety some time later in the season.

If the rain sticks around too long for a rain delay, and the game is at least five full innings, and the home team is currently in the lead, OR the visiting team is in the lead and the lead did not change hands during the current, interrupted inning, the game is over, with the leading team winning, and the score as it stands.

If the rain sticks around too long for a delay, and the game is at least five full innings, and the game is tied, OR the visiting team is in the lead and the lead changed hands during the current, interrupted inning, then the game is suspended and will be resumed sometime later in the season, starting right back up at the point where it was stopped.

Please note that these are the rules as they stand today, not as they stood at the time of the Rockwell illustration. However nothing in the rules has changed relative to the illustration–in 1949, as today, if that game were to be interrupted and not finished, Pittsburgh would win 1-0.

[Freddy_the_Pig]

@Colibri

The Dodger manager doesn’t look a lot like Burt Shotten, who was the actual manager that year (unless he lost his glasses). The Pittsburgh manager could pass for Billy Meyer, the actual manager that year, however.

Per the other thread, the Dodger is coach Clyde Sukeforth, not the manager. Which makes sense, I suppose, since the Brooklyn base coaches would already be on the field.

What puzzles me, about the illustration, is that it isn’t raining hard enough for the umpires to have to huddle and consider a delay. I think that it is one of those off-and-on rains; it was harder a minute ago, leading the umpires to huddle, but now it has already tapered off into a drizzle, leading to the colorful dialogue between the Brooklyn coach and the Pittsburgh manager.

[Skywatcher]

@Freddy_the_Pig

Per the other thread, the Dodger is coach Clyde Sukeforth, not the manager. Which makes sense, I suppose, since the Brooklyn base coaches would already be on the field.

Particularly if Shotton was known for managing in a suit rather than a uniform.

[BeeGee]

@Colibri

As mentioned in the other thread, the scoreboard and right field were on the east side of Ebbets Field, the Dodger’s home park. Thunderstorms in the US most frequently move from west to east, so the storm is most likely moving in, since the sky is blue towards the east.

However, I agree that the amount of rain shown is not going to cause them to call the game in the immediate future. In fact, a few drops wouldn’t even cause them to call a rain delay. That’s a bit of dramatic license on Rockwell’s part.

Not sure about 1949, but these days games may be delayed due to lightning with no rain falling.