As a corollary, pitchers can then be charged with earned runs for runs allowed after an error that “would have been the third out.” Which is good, because those runs certainly were earned. I mean, the batters still had to hit the ball. If the batting team shouldn’t have scored runs because the inning should have ended, then why is there no “unearned RBI” category for batters?
I would want that scored as a base hit. That’s also a ridiculous scoring convention.
Because the that batter did what he was supposed to do. It is irrelevant that there should have been a third out as far as this batter is concerned. In fact yo’d be penalizing the batter even more.
Two outs. Next batter reaches on an error. Next batter singles. Next hits a home run. How many RBIs? Current scoring gives 3. You want 0. With errorless play, batter would have had 2 the next inning.
Yes I know things might have gone differently next inning, but there’s no way to correct for that under the current scoring either.
That is usually true, but there is another factor. If the first baseman were holding the runner, the scorer is likely to award a steal. If the first baseman is not holding the runner and playing back to cover more ground, the defense is basically telling the runner he is free to take second base, and the scorer should score it as DI.
Now one rule I think is stupid is that a batter is awarded a hit when his ground ball hits a runner before it passes an infielder. It should be scored the same as what would likely have happened had the ball not hit the runner - a fielder’s choice or ground out (without being able to assume a double play.)
Sacrifice flies are stupid. The hitter doesn’t really give himself up. He’s trying to drive the ball but would really prefer to have a hit. His fly that scores a man on third doesn’t count as an at bat, but a fly that advances a runner from 2nd to 3rd does count as an at bat. There is no ‘sacrifice hit’ for a batter who grounds to the opposite side to score a run; there should be no sac fly for scoring a runner on a fly.
Another rule misapplied a lot – the runner is not supposed to be awarded a sacrifice bunt if the scorer believes he was bunting for a hit. (See Larry Walker, Game 4, 1st inning, 2004 World Series.) It’s a bit of a dumb rule, maybe, but the hitter almost always gets a sacrifice.
Bunting a runner over is not a trivial play and many things can happen. You might pop it up into a DP. You might lay down such a superb bunt that you get a hit. You might lay down such a poor bunt that the runner is out at second; occasionally with a DP. And then I recall a play that happened just about 70 years ago. A Phillies player named Harry (the hat) Walker tried to lay down a bunt and popped over the charging first baseman’s head. The ball rolled all the way to the right field wall and Walker went to third, the base-runner scoring. The throw to third missed the third baseman and Walker scored. He was credited with a triple.
Frankly I think most of the scoring rules make sense. The sac fly is dubious, granted. They didn’t have it 70 years ago, although they had had it earlier and dropped it. Batting average is based on hits per at-bats and neither errors nor FCs are hits. The only scoring rule that I find indefensible is the WP/LP rule. It goes back to the days that most pitchers pitched complete games, win or lose. I have no idea how to patch it except to give fractional wins. Maybe some formula could be devised based on the number of batters faced and the number of runs, or earned runs, given up but it sounds pretty complicated. Maybe they should forget the whole stat and measure pitching effectiveness by ERA.
Agreed. From my post above:
Emphasis added.
Not a baseball fan at all. So let me see if I get this straight: a player who steals a base is not given credit because the other team just didn’t care to even try to stop him, due to it not affecting the win/lose outcome of the game?
To my non-fan ears, that seems ridiculous, and against how I’ve been taught sportsmanship my entire life. You still always try. Sure, if there was a tactical reason not to do it, fine. But then that apparently still counts as a steal.
If you’re going to have stats that are affected by things outside of what that person actually does, it would seem to me then that they need to be consistent. And the easiest way to make it consistent would be to allow a steal, but then actually have players try to stop those steals.
Again, let me stress that I’m not a baseball fan, and what I’m saying may be completely stupid. But it’s what I thought when reading this thread. Normally I don’t say anything when I read a thread about a sport I don’t know much about. But this one just seems bonkers.
Plus I thought an outsider perspective might be interesting, if not useful.
It’s like the TV on the sidewalk with a “Free” sign on it. The other team is giving the base away, there’s no risk involved.
What you’re saying isn’t stupid at all, and a lot of baseball fans find the rule a little bizarre as well.
Baseball scoring rules have a surprising number of places where the scorer scored exactly the same act differently based on her/his perception of a player’s intentions, as opposed to a simple record of what happened.
It makes me wonder how many other sports judge stats this way.
I know in football where a score is so lopsided late in the game that they enter “garbage time” and backup players go onto the field, those stats still count. I assume most sports are like that. How many other sports judge stats like baseball?
There is a tactical reason. Fielder indifference is scored when (I want to say only when but it is a subjective scorer decision much like hit v. error, passed ball v. wild pitch, so perhaps not, but I’ve never seen it) the first baseman does not hold the runner on but instead plays back. When the runner is not held on, he can get a much bigger lead, and it is almost impossible to throw the runner (except for the slowest) out at second. The tactical reason for this is that the team on defense has a two or more run lead late in the game (usually just the ninth or extra innings), so they don’t really care if the runner on first scores. What they don’t want is for the batter to get a hit. Playing back allows the first baseman cover more ground and prevent some hits.
What else would you call it when the score is out of hand, the runner is not being held on, and the defense is indifferent to whether the runner advances or not?
Again, I think this needs to be really, really clear; that is wrong.
“Defensive indifference” is NOT determined by the fielder playing back or not. That is something the scorer can consider in determining DI, but it is not the only factor and isn’t even the most important factor. Many things can be considered - in fact, the scorer can even decide to award a stolen base if he thinks the defensive team is acting indifferently to prevent the runner from leading the league in stolen bases (yes, that is in the rulebook.) Other factors include whether any pickoff attempt is made, whether an infielder breaks to cover the base the runner is advancing to, or whether there is a tactical reason not to make an attempt. For instance, tie game, seventh inning, men on first and third; the runner at third is the fastest man in the game, like Billy Hamilton. The defense decides any throw to second will allow Hamilton to score, so the first baseman plays back because hes better off being in good position for a grounder. The runner then takes second. That’s a stolen base; the rules actually use that specific example and call that out as a steal, not DI. In any event, the most important factor is whether or not the advanced base will matter in the outcome of the game.
[QUOTE=Atamasama]
It makes me wonder how many other sports judge stats this way.
I know in football where a score is so lopsided late in the game that they enter “garbage time” and backup players go onto the field, those stats still count. I assume most sports are like that. How many other sports judge stats like baseball?
[/QUOTE]
None I can think of. But allow me to defend baseball a little;
-
Baseball, to a large extent, invented the concept of statistical scoring rules. More or less every modern convention of the statistical measure of athletes in a team sport started with baseball, which was a major concern before the other major North American sports leagues even existed. So they were the first to come up with this stuff and, hey, they didn’t get everything right. Additionally, many - most, actually - of these rules were invented in the 19th century, and 19th century baseball was different than it is today. Errors were a more important concept, wins and losses were almost always awarded to the right pitcher, and sacrifice bunts were more common.
-
Because baseball places a huge amount of value in its statistics and their history, a radical change to the way things are scored would not be well received. If you eliminate the defensive indifference rule, and Bill steals 131 bases to break Rickey Henderson’s record of 130, millions of people will be howling that Bill would only have had 129 stolen bases under the old defensive indifference rule.
I mean, I am quite steadfast in my belief that it is idiotic to charge a hitter with an out when he reaches base on an error and there was never an out made; that was a dumb, dumb mistake made over a century ago. But I’m also nervous about the idea of changing it because if you do, some guy will hit .300 and people will bitch and whine that it should have been .298. Some guy will set a new Blue Jays record for batting average by hitting .364 and John Olerud will come out of the woodwork and say his .363 was REALLY the higher number. God help us if someone becomes the first man since Ted Williams to bat .400, and it’s pointed out it would have been .398 if you still counted errors as outs.
People bitching and whining about stats in other sports happens. Going back to football, I look at the Carolina Panthers who a couple years ago were almost undefeated in the regular season (they only lost one game). But people point out that their opponents were pretty awful (they had a weak schedule) which while not eliminating their accomplishments (their quarterback won MVP and even I thought he earned it) it does tarnish them somewhat. That’s why football has things like “power rankings” where you judge a team’s strength of schedule, record, and other factors to determine how good they are (sure they’re undefeated but their star quarterback is out for the season with a torn ACL, etc.). And those things are largely subjective (one group says a team is #1, another says they are #3). On a player level, you have things like “quarterback rating” which some people consider the ultimate stat and others consider to be useless.
So I guess it’s just a different philosophy. Most sports officially record raw stats and facts and let others interpret their importance. Baseball tries to interpret them as they’re recorded. I think there’s a reason why it’s the only sport that does that though. 
What about defensive indifference to batted balls?
Suppose it’s the top of the ninth and the home team is leading 13-1 and there are two outs and no one on base. The batter hits an easy ground ball scooped up by the second baseman. However, the pitcher has 20 strikeouts and a shot at the record, so instead of throwing to first, the fielder just holds on to the ball and allows the runner to reach first base (and the next potential strikeout victim to bat).
How is that scored?
If, in the opinion of the official scorer, the runner would have been out if the infielder had executed a play requiring normal effort, then the infielder would be charged with an error.
That is not an error, by definition. Rule 9.12 specifically says that “Slow handling” of a ball, not involving an actual misplay, is not an error. Errors are limited to “misplays,” which mean wild throws, allowing a ball to go through you, or fumbling the ball.
Wow. Did not know that. Good clarification. Man, I would really hate to be an official scorer.
So, what about a situation where an outfielder catches a fly ball, and mistakingly thinking it was the third out, hangs on the to the ball and starts trotting in. An alert baserunner takes the opportunity to tag up and advance.
Error on the outfielder?
No, that’s not an error.
If, however, the outfielder were to forget how many outs there were and hand the ball to a fan, well, that’s a two base error. But that’d never happen, right?
Oh, but, I mean it wouldn’t happen twi…
