rule "inconsistencies?"

Seapig <seapig.RemoveThis@altavista.com> trolled:
>On Jul 12, 8:44 am, espon....RemoveThis@webtv.net (F R) wrote:

>> 1----runner on third. pitcher throws wild pitch to batter. runner on
>> third scores. this is an earned run since it was the pitcher's fault,
>> unlike a passed ball which would be an unearned run. so far so good.
>> but, with a runner on third, the batter hits a one hopper to the pitcher
>> who throws wildly to first allowing the runner on third to score. this
>> is the pitcher's error on the throw and the run is now an unearned run.
>> so he can make an "error" throwing to home plate and the run is
>> "earned", but not to any other base where the run now becomes
>> "unearned".

>I think it's because the stats treat pitching and fielding as two
>separate activities - it's why wild pitches aren't considered errors.
>Earned runs are meant to be a measure of a guy's pitching prowess, so
>his failures as a fielder don't enter into it. Those just show up in
>his fielding stats.

And the reason for that is because errors have repurcussions on the
hitter's stats, while wild pitches and passed balls have less so.

cordially, as always,

rm
 >> Stay informed about: rule "inconsistencies?" 

esponda2.DeleteThis@webtv.net (F R) writes:

>1----runner on third. pitcher throws wild pitch to batter. runner on
>third scores. this is an earned run since it was the pitcher's fault,
>unlike a passed ball which would be an unearned run.

The status of the run on a passed ball depends on subsequent play. If
the defense makes a mistake (error or passed ball) that allows a
runner to advance but doesn't prevent an out from being recorded, runs
scoring on the play can be either earned or unearned depending on how
the rest of the inning plays out. If subsequent batters generate
enough offense that the runners who scored would have done so even
without the mistake, the runs are earned. Examples:

1) Bases loaded, two out. Catcher muffs the pitch for a passed ball,
allowing all runners to advance one base. Batter homers on the next
pitch. All runs are earned because they would have scored on the
homerun even had the passed ball never happened.

2) Bases loaded, two out. Catcher muffs the pitch for a passed ball,
allowing all runners to advance one base. Batter singles on the next
pitch and is thrown out trying to stretch for a double after both
runners have scored. Two runs are earned and one unearned. The
runners on third and second would have scored on the hit even if the
passed ball had never happened, but the official scorer rules that the
runner who had been on first would not have scored before the final
out was recorded.

3) Bases loaded, two out. Catcher gives up a passed ball, allowing
all runners to advance one base. Batter strikes out on the next
pitch. The run that scored on the passed ball is unearned.

>so far so good.
>but, with a runner on third, the batter hits a one hopper to the pitcher
>who throws wildly to first allowing the runner on third to score. this
>is the pitcher's error on the throw and the run is now an unearned run.

It's only an unearned run if the batter would have been retired for
the third out. If there were none or one out, the run is earned. In
that case the error is irrelevant to the score, since the runner from
third would have scored even if the pitcher's throw to first had been
accurate.

>so he can make an "error" throwing to home plate and the run is
>"earned", but not to any other base where the run now becomes
>"unearned".

No, the pitcher is not "throwing" to home plate when he makes a wild
pitch; he is pitching to home when he does so. There are
substantially different rules for what a pitcher does when he throws
to a base compared to when he pitches. For example, the pitcher is
never forced to throw to a base, but once he's committed to throwing
home he must do so or be charged with a balk. If a pitch is so high
that it sails into the stands, runners on base are awarded one base,
but if the pitcher steps off the rubber and makes the same throw
they're awarded two bases. Pitching and throwing are treated enough
differently by the playing rules that it makes sense that they would
be treated differently in the scoring rules, too.

--
Roger Moore | Master of Meaningless Trivia | (raj@alumni.caltech.edu)
There's no point in questioning authority if you don't listen to the answers.
 >> Stay informed about: rule "inconsistencies?" 

roger moore snip>

It's only an unearned run if the batter would have been retired for the
third out. If there were none or one out, the run is earned. In that
case the error is irrelevant to the score, since the runner from third
would have scored even if the pitcher's throw to first had been
accurate.
----------------------------------
first of all, thanks to you and the others for the
clarification/interpretation of the rules roger.

from the paragraph above.... what if the pitcher first looks the runner
on third back to the bag and then makes a wild throw to first?, meaning
the runner would not have socred if the pitcher's throw was accurate?

frank
 >> Stay informed about: rule "inconsistencies?" 

"F R" <esponda2.TakeThisOut@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:22450-46964C48-148@storefull-3316.bay.webtv.net...
>i know what the rules are in the 2 examples i'm about to cite, but to me
> they somehow lack a bit of common sense.
>
> 1----runner on third. pitcher throws wild pitch to batter. runner on
> third scores. this is an earned run since it was the pitcher's fault,
> unlike a passed ball which would be an unearned run. so far so good.
> but, with a runner on third, the batter hits a one hopper to the pitcher
> who throws wildly to first allowing the runner on third to score. this
> is the pitcher's error on the throw and the run is now an unearned run.
> so he can make an "error" throwing to home plate and the run is
> "earned", but not to any other base where the run now becomes
> "unearned".

A wild pitch is not an error, and a throwing error by the pitcher has
nothing to do with his pitching ability.

> 2. bottom of the 9th. visiting team is leading 10-1. runner on first.
> the pitcher is paying no attention to the runner and the first baseman
> is of course not holding him on so the runner takes off for second on
> the pitch and makes it easily. the catcher doesn't even bother to throw
> to second.
> this is not a stolen base but defensive indifference, or whatever its
> called.
>
> but, if the runner takes off for second and trips and the catcher throws
> the ball to the second baseman, who goes to the fallen runner and tags
> him out, it's recorded as an out on an attempted steal. so if he makes
> it to second safely it's not a stolen base nor an attempt, but if he's
> tagged out while on the ground it IS considered an attempted stolen
> base.

How else are you going to score it?
 >> Stay informed about: rule "inconsistencies?" 

2. bottom of the 9th. visiting team is leading 10-1. runner on first.
the pitcher is paying no attention to the runner and the first baseman
is of course not holding him on so the runner takes off for second on
the pitch and makes it easily. the catcher doesn't even bother to throw
to second.
this is not a stolen base but defensive indifference, or whatever its
called.
but, if the runner takes off for second and trips and the catcher throws
the ball to the second baseman, who goes to the fallen runner and tags
him out, it's recorded as an out on an attempted steal. so if he makes
it to second safely it's not a stolen base nor an attempt, but if he's
tagged out while on the ground it IS considered an attempted stolen
base.
----------------------------------
ryan roberts>
How else are you going to score it?
------------------------------------
i would score it as an out attempting to steal too ryan, but would
credit the guy with a stolen base if he made it... regardless of the
"defensive indifference". this is a fairly new "rule" isn't it? wasn't
the runner for most of the 20th century credited with a stolen base?

frank
 >> Stay informed about: rule "inconsistencies?" 

esponda2.TakeThisOut@webtv.net (F R) writes:

>from the paragraph above.... what if the pitcher first looks the runner
>on third back to the bag and then makes a wild throw to first?, meaning
>the runner would not have socred if the pitcher's throw was accurate?

It still depends on what happens in the rest of the inning. The rules
say that the scorer is supposed to "reconstruct" the inning without
errors, and use the reconstructed inning to determine which runs would
have scored even if the errors hadn't happened. That means that
unlike the effect of reaching safely on an error, which always results
in the runner who reached being unearned, errors that result in
runners advancing don't have a single, universal effect. It always
depends on the rest of the inning. So for your the example of the
pitcher looking the runner back to third, consider the following:

1) One out, Aaron on third. Collins bounces to pitcher, who looks
Aaron back to third, then throws wildly to first allowing Aaron to
score. 2B backs up the play and keeps Collins from advancing past
first. DiMaggio grounds into a double play to end the inning.
Without the error, Aaron would have stayed at third on Collins's
grounder and been stranded when DiMaggio grounded out to end the
inning, so his run is unearned.

2) Same as 1), but DiMaggio singles instead of GIDP. Evers and Foxx
strike out to end the inning. Even though the pitcher looked him back
to third, Aaron still would have scored on DiMaggio's single, so his
run is now earned.

3) Same as 1), but DiMaggio homers before Evers and Foxx make outs to
end the inning. As in 2), Aaron would have scored on DiMaggio's homer
even had Collins not reached, so his run is earned. DiMaggio would
have scored on his own homer even without the error, so his run is
earned, too. But Collins wouldn't have been on base without the
error, so his run is unearned.

4) Same as 1), but DiMaggio grounds out to second, allowing Collins to
advance. Evers doubles home Collins and Foxx strikes out to end the
inning. DiMaggio's ground out would have ended the inning before
Aaron could have scored, so his run is unearned. Collins wouldn't
have been on base without the error, so his run is unearned, too.

5) Same as 4), but Foxx homers to drive in Evers before Gwynn lines
out to end the inning. Without the error, DiMaggio's ground out would
have ended the inning, so all subsequent runs are unearned, even on
homers.

--
Roger Moore | Master of Meaningless Trivia | (raj@alumni.caltech.edu)
There's no point in questioning authority if you don't listen to the answers.
 >> Stay informed about: rule "inconsistencies?" 

In <f7aljo$fui$1@naig.caltech.edu> raj.TakeThisOut@alumnae.caltech.edu (Roger Moore) writes:

>esponda2@webtv.net (F R) writes:

>>from the paragraph above.... what if the pitcher first looks the runner
>>on third back to the bag and then makes a wild throw to first?, meaning
>>the runner would not have socred if the pitcher's throw was accurate?

>It still depends on what happens in the rest of the inning. The rules
>say that the scorer is supposed to "reconstruct" the inning without
>errors, and use the reconstructed inning to determine which runs would
>have scored even if the errors hadn't happened.

How do they handle intentional walks? Say a runner on 1st advances
to 2nd on a wild pickoff throw. Then the batter gets an intentional
walk. Then a base hit scores the runner from 2nd. Then out(s) to
end the inning. If the IBB is treated the same as a BB, the run is
earned (because a BB would advance the runner to 2nd). But we know
the IBB only occurred because 1st base was open. So you can't really
reconstruct the inning without the error, because you don't know what
that batter would have done. (Of course this is true more generally--
everything changes, but this is just a more blatant example.)
--
Jim
New York, NY
(Please remove "nospam." to get my e-mail address)
http://www.panix.com/~kahn
 >> Stay informed about: rule "inconsistencies?" 

On Jul 14, 3:07 pm, k... DeleteThis @nospam.panix.com (James Kahn) wrote:
> In <f7aljo$fu...@naig.caltech.edu> r... DeleteThis @alumnae.caltech.edu (Roger Moore) writes:
>
> >espon...@webtv.net (F R) writes:
> >>from the paragraph above.... what if the pitcher first looks the runner
> >>on third back to the bag and then makes a wild throw to first?, meaning
> >>the runner would not have socred if the pitcher's throw was accurate?
> >It still depends on what happens in the rest of the inning. The rules
> >say that the scorer is supposed to "reconstruct" the inning without
> >errors, and use the reconstructed inning to determine which runs would
> >have scored even if the errors hadn't happened.
>
> How do they handle intentional walks? Say a runner on 1st advances
> to 2nd on a wild pickoff throw. Then the batter gets an intentional
> walk. Then a base hit scores the runner from 2nd. Then out(s) to
> end the inning. If the IBB is treated the same as a BB, the run is
> earned (because a BB would advance the runner to 2nd). But we know
> the IBB only occurred because 1st base was open. So you can't really
> reconstruct the inning without the error, because you don't know what
> that batter would have done. (Of course this is true more generally--
> everything changes, but this is just a more blatant example.)

Intentional walks are treated like any other walks. Rule 10.18 says,
in part:

"For the purpose of determining earned runs, an intentional base on
balls, regardless of the circumstances, shall be construed in exactly
the same manner as any other base on balls."

I have another question along these lines. What do they do about
catcher's interference? It's easy enough to "reconstruct" other
errors - if a guy didn't drop a fly ball, he would have caught it; if
a guy didn't make a bad throw, he would have made a good throw. But,
there's no way to know what a batter would have done if he hadn't been
interfered with.
 >> Stay informed about: rule "inconsistencies?"