The runner deserves the credit for stealing. He is taking a chance. He has no way of knowing the fielders will ignore his attempt to steal. And you know damn well that if the runner trips on his way to the next base; the team will magically “care” and throw the ball to the appropriate fielder to tag him out. I don’t think the fielding team should be able to have it both ways.
If you want to create such a rule then automatically advance the runner in those situations; or else you have to award the runner an SB for daring to run.
And don’t get me started on the equally annoying automatic awarding of 1st on an intentional walk, without having to throw 4 balls.
There are certain situations that practically guarantee defensive indifference. Why should the runner get credit for a stolen base with non-existent risk?
Because there is a risk, always. Unless you put in it the rule book that if a runner, under those defensive conditions, trips on his way to another base, or even walks to the base, that he cannot be tagged out. You cannot say the defenders don’t care (they don’t want to risk throwing the ball away) and yet care if the runner becomes “vulnerable”.
Pick one. The defenders shouldn’t get both.
Even an intentional walk is still a BB.
An indifference to stealing ought to be an SB.
Would it be crazy to compare this to the judgement call akin to when a batter doesn’t get a hit on a fielder’s error?
BTW, I can’t be the only one who always wants to see a batter getting walked to take a couple of quick steps over and smash the crap out of one of those lobs. Now the dream is gone.
He’d be called out for leaving the batter’s box while doing so. From here.
Which is why an intentional walk involved pitches so far outside that they were very nearly wild pitches. And occasionally were with hilarious results.
It’s quite haphazardly applied, though. I watched a Cubs-Braves game where they awarded a SB to a Cubs pitcher who ran without a throw, in a situation where no sane catcher would have thrown, the perfect indifference situation. I chuckled.
Defensive indifference is poorly defined in the rulebook and I’d guess more than half of cases I’ve seen where it was called made no sense at all.
Quite honestly, baseball has a LOT of scoring problems, more than most fans will admit:
Reaching base on errors being counted as outs. This makes no sense at all. Assigning a nonexistent out to a batter’s statistics is just ludicrous and warps the numbers, and makes a distinction between different types of defensive ineptitude that doesn’t matter.
Reaching base on unsuccessful fielder’s choices being counted as outs - Even dumber than #1.
Baserunning errors not being counted - I find it amazing that a guy who gets a base hit, tries to stretch it into a double, and gets thrown out for his stupidity, and in so doing makes his hit pointless, isn’t in any way statistically penalized for that. At the very least it should be counted as a caught stealing.
How pitching wins are assigned. Come on. You blow a lead and get to be the winning pitcher?
I agree with all the points being made here, but on the other hand, if all the scoring crap was fixed, what would we and the announcers talk about during rain delays and boring lopsided games?
Well, during the Mariners games, they have no problem doing *endless *promotions for the next bobblehead night or–the past few weeks–Edgar’s number retirement weekend. I love Edgar as much as anyone, but I seriously don’t need a reminder every inning of every game.
Why can’t a batter say to the ump, “look, I’m going to sacrifice the man on first over to second” and have the runner on first automatically awarded second base? Don’t say it’s because he actually has to execute the bunt – the pitcher throwing an IBB has (or used to have) to actually execute it too… for that matter, why can’t the batter say, look I’m going to hit a home run here…
Laying down a bunt against a pitcher trying to not throw a buntable pitch is far harder than four easy tosses wide of the plate.
ETA: With the runner going, the batter must make contact on that pitch.
I’m not sure if you’re doing this specifically, so I don’t mean to call you out here, but I get the feeling sometimes that people are confusing defensive indifference with not wanting to risk a throw. They definitely aren’t the same thing.
In a situation in the middle of a game where there’s a runner on first and a runner on third, and the runner on first takes off, if the catcher chooses not to throw to second because of the risk of the runner on third coming home, that is properly a stolen base. There’s no “indifference” involved. The catcher would definitely prefer not to let that guy get to second, but the risk there outweighs the reward.
Indifference would apply in a situation where it’s the bottom of the 9th, there are two outs, there’s a man on first base, and the offensive team is trailing by three runs. It’s a situation where the only thing that matters is getting the batter out to end the game. If the person currently on first base happens to score, that is (in and of itself) immaterial to the outcome of the game. Other signs pointing to actual indifference would be that the first baseman isn’t holding the runner on, and that neither the shortstop nor the second baseman breaks to cover second when the runner moves.
Speaking of bunting, if you successfully lay one down the left side of the infield to thwart an infielders’ overshift to the right, should you not be credited with a hit due to “fielders’ indifference”?
Of course not. They’re not indifferent to your getting on base. They’re defensing you in the way they believe best to defense it. It would be a bit like saying a force play at second is fielder indifference in not getting the batter out. They choose to do something else instead.
Doesn’t it “warp the numbers” to give a batter credit for something he didn’t earn and deserve? The guy hit into an out. Why should he get credit for the defense screwing up?
Same thing. The guy hit into an out, *then *the defense screwed up. If his BA is to mean anything, it should show he hit into an out.
[/QUOTE]
