So, listening to the Rays announcers just brought up one hypothetical and led my mind to think of another...
1) Batter flies out into foul territory, right fielder makes an error on the ball. Hitter obviously doesn't reach base on the error as it was foul and proceeds to strike out. Assuming no other hiccups, is this a perfect game?
2) Batter strikes out but reaches base on a wild pitch. He steals second and eventually scores. Does him reaching base violate the perfect game?
Win one for The Boss.
For (1) I'd say yes. And for (2) I'd say yes.
I thought the key difference between a perfecto and a run-of-the-mill no-no was that in the former, no men reach base. An error in foul territory keeps the bases clear, whereas a wild pitch does not.
Stella said, "Daddy when you gonna put me in a song?"
(Visit the companion site to NYYFans! It's more than meets the eye: The new Political Soapbox)
1) is a Perfect GameOriginally Posted by justtxyank
2) is not a Perfect Game.
In a Perfect Game no runner can reach base in any manner.
If I had 3 wishes... One of my wishes would be to make a select few of you Pirates Fans.
I have a question too, but it has nothing to do with perfect games. Why do they call a closer a closer? Why dont they call them saviors?
I don't believe, in scenario 1, that the RF would be charged an error, it would be a no play so the question of that affecting the perfecto would be moot.
edit: and suddenly i'm in the mood to do some shoe shopping
Ah, dammit! I want pancakes! God, do you people understand every language except English? Yo quiero pancakes. Donnez moi pancakes. Click click, bloody click pancakes!
-- Stewie Griffin
I don't think either one is a perfect game. I remember this came up when Brosius caught the last out in Cone's game in (almost) foul territory.
I think it has to be 27 batters retired with no errors by the defense.
Don't look down here.
I agree with this.
Calmer than you are.
Ditto
September 28, 2008 - the day the HOF got a wake-up Moose call.
Because he appears closer to the end of the game than any other pitcher.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.- Barry Manilow
Defense has nothing to do with a perfect game, it's merely retiring all 27 batters faced (or more), so scenario 1 would be a perfect game.
http://www.mlb.com/mlb/official_info...egulations.jspAn official perfect game occurs when a pitcher (or pitchers) retires each batter on the opposing team during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings. In a perfect game, no batter reaches any base during the course of the game
probably the same reason they don't call pitchers "winners." Closers close the game. They get "saves"
A fool and his money can throw one heck of a party!
That's not correct. If I recall, in the first no-hitter Mark pitched, he faced the minimum 27 batters as well. Sosa reached on a walk, but was picked off. He faced the minimum 27 batters, but it wasn't a perfect game. For a perfect game, *no* batter can reach base, under any circumstances.
*EDIT: I think I read your post wrong. We're on the same page.
-Will-
If we had ham, we could have ham and eggs--if we had eggs.
In scenario one the RF would be charged an error. You can make an error in foul territory. I originally thought that that would break up the PG, but based on what Mr. M posted, I'd say that I was mistaken and it would not. The second one would break up the perfect game.
"My point is you can't compare things with statistics." -Joe Morgan
"I've always felt that starting pitching is the most important part of the rotation." -Joe Morgan
Kevin: New York Squeaks
I've never seen an error "awarded" that, ultimately had no bearing on the outcome of an inning, let alone an at bat.
Practically speaking, the official scorer would probably have waited util the AB was finished. If the batter had ultimately reached, he probably would have given the RF and error. If the at-bat finished as the OP suggested, the drop would be ignored.
Ah, dammit! I want pancakes! God, do you people understand every language except English? Yo quiero pancakes. Donnez moi pancakes. Click click, bloody click pancakes!
-- Stewie Griffin
I haven't either, but by rule that is an error:
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info..._scorer_10.jspAn error is a statistic charged against a fielder whose action has assisted the team on offense, as set forth in this Rule 10.12.
(a) The official scorer shall charge an error against any fielder:
(1) whose misplay (fumble, muff or wild throw) prolongs the time at bat of a batter, prolongs the presence on the bases of a runner or permits a runner to advance one or more bases, unless, in the judgment of the official scorer, such fielder deliberately permits a foul fly to fall safe with a runner on third base before two are out in order that the runner on third shall not score after the catch;
(2) when such fielder muffs a foul fly to prolong the time at bat of a batter, whether the batter subsequently reaches first base or is put out;
interesting... did not know that
Ah, dammit! I want pancakes! God, do you people understand every language except English? Yo quiero pancakes. Donnez moi pancakes. Click click, bloody click pancakes!
-- Stewie Griffin
Always wondered about this too. I agree with the consensus that 1 is a perfect game and 2 isn't.
"We understand that John Henry must be embarrassed, frustrated and disappointed by his failure in this transaction. Unlike the Yankees, he chose not to go the extra distance for his fans in Boston."
Scenario no. 1 is a perfect game. Scenario no. 2 is not.
I can't complain but sometimes I still do. - Joe Walsh
1. Yes
2. No
Imagine losing a perfect game on catchers interference?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote