Why is it called a 'no-hitter' when there are hits?

The Game Room
61

But why does “morality” only enter into it part of the time? If “fairness” is the standard, if we’re supposed to think “The batter didn’t really DESERVE a hit on that grounder, he just got lucky because Derek Jeter muffed it,” why can’t we say, “The batter DID deserve a hit on that line drive, and he was just UNlucky that Brooks Robinson made an amazing diving catch?”

If it’s “unfair” to charge CC Sabathia with a run because the guy who scored “should” have been out earlier, why shouldn’t we charge him with 4 runs if he gives up a deep fly ball with the bases loaded, but the outfielder snags it just as it’s about to go over the wall? After all, that “should” have been a homer!

I know, I know, there’s no perfect (let alone perfectly fair/just) system, but I’m curious why we don’t either:

  1. toss out notions of fairness entirely, or

  2. take fairness into account ALL the time.

62

“Fairness” isn’t the right word. Harry Wright didn’t see it as unfair when a team won or lost a game by virtue of the opponents’ or their own errors in the field. That was part of the game, and indeed in many games of the time he would have reckoned the majority of runs “unearned.” Which might have suggested that there was something odd about his perspective on whose responsibility certain game events were. Nevertheless, he invented a lot of the scoring system that has been handed down ever since.