Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

Official Scoring Questions for Stew

  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#41 steve

steve

    Member

  • Members
  • 88 posts

Posted 02 August 2017 - 07:35 AM

 

Last night with Castro on first in the 3rd, Barrios bunts.Myers charges and makes an errant throw to second which, to me, the runner would have been safe regardless.Could it have been ruled a sacrifice with an E-3 allowing the runners to advance instead of an E-3, thus charging Barrios with an bat?To me, Barrios was giving himself up and did his job.

 

Was wondering about this one at the time. Barrios, clearly was attempting to sacrifice. However, a brief perusal of the internets seems to show that a SAC cannot be scored unless the batter actually sacrifices himself, ie is out. Because Barrios was safe at first, no SAC.

 

Is this correct?

Edited by steve, 02 August 2017 - 07:36 AM.

Can you all just do me one favor Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any one of us.


#42 yarnivek1972

yarnivek1972

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 1,794 posts

Posted 02 August 2017 - 07:15 PM

Was wondering about this one at the time. Barrios, clearly was attempting to sacrifice. However, a brief perusal of the internets seems to show that a SAC cannot be scored unless the batter actually sacrifices himself, ie is out. Because Barrios was safe at first, no SAC.

Is this correct?


I know that isn't correct. Hitters can get credit for a sacrifice (and thus no at bat) on an error. My guess in this case is that in the judgement of the official scorer, a good throw would have gotten Castro out. Hence, a failed sacrifice and a charged time at bat.

The general rule of thumb with errors is to try to piece together what would have happened if there was no error. In a batter reaching on an error on a sacrifice, without the error a successful sacrifice would take place. In the Berrios case, no error would have meant an unsuccessful sacrifice - at least in the scorers' judgement. I remember the play. My recollection is that a good throw results in an out. But I wouldn't swear by that recollection.

#43 stewthornley

stewthornley

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 03 August 2017 - 05:14 AM

Good questions from the San Diego series.  (I didn't see the double-switch that got asked about.  What happened?)

 

Regarding Myers's throw to second on Berrios's bunt, I also wondered how that would be scored.  Had the runner beaten the throw, then it would be a fielder's choice with a sacrifice for Berrios.  From the replay, it looked like a good throw would have had the runner beat, so it was an error on Myers for failure to get the out at second.  In that case, no sacrifice for Berrios.  

 

On the sacrifice fly with an RBI, the way a batter can't get an RBI on a double play is if he grounds into a force or reverse-force double play and is charged with a grounded into double play (GIDP).  As it happens, I just wrote about this in what John has dubbed "The Stew Review" after Todd Frazier grounded into a triple play. 

 

A standard 643 double play - force at second, batter out at first - is a GIDP.  So is a 3-6 reverse force - batter out with a throw to second to tag the runner coming in from first.  No RBI on first.  But a batter can get an RBI on other kinds of double plays, including ground balls that turn into two outs but don't have two force outs or a reverse-force.

 

In the sacrifice fly in the Twins game, the third out was made on a tag play, with the runner from second trying to go to third.  This is a time play (not a timing play, the umpires tell me; they use the term time play).  The run crossed before the third out.  Since the third out wasn't a force, the run counts and the batter gets an RBI.

 

Here is more of a playing than scoring rules question.  What if the runner from second had been doubled off the base rather than tagged out after tagging and trying to advance?  Could a run score on that if the runner crossed the plate before the third out?  Yes, although this is confusing to a lot of folks, including players and managers.  Getting doubled off a base isn't a force, even though it has the same element as a force in that the runner doesn't have to be tagged.  In 2010 the Twins lost a run by not knowing this.  Punto on third, Span on second with one out and a long fly to center.  Punto tagged, Span took off.  The ball was caught, and Span was going to be doubled off for the third out.  What Punto needed to do was beat cheeks to the plate to cross before the third out.  However, he was more focused on waving at Span to get back.  He then jogged toward the plate because he thought it wouldn't matter since he thought his run couldn't count if Span was doubled off.  There was a lot in the game story the next day about how no one realized that this was still a time play and that Punto's run would have counted had he gotten home before they doubled Span off second.  And then the next year the same thing happened with Alexi Casilla.

 

Always pays to know the rules.

  • Parker Hageman, steve and Sconnie like this

#44 zenser

zenser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 443 posts

Posted 03 August 2017 - 07:19 AM

Thanks for the answers!Great info!

  • spinowner likes this

#45 spinowner

spinowner

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 3,533 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 08:21 PM

Bottom 6 on Aug. 4, Dozier awarded a hit when the throw from 3rd bounced and the 1B didn't handle the hop, but the replay showed Dozier was 6 feet away from the base when the ball arrived. Why isn't that an error?

eiπ + 1 = 0


#46 Old Twins Cap

Old Twins Cap

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 536 posts

Posted 04 August 2017 - 09:29 PM

Because, .... home field advantage, in that the Official Scorer favors rulings that help Twins hitters and pitchers, as much as possible.


#47 stewthornley

stewthornley

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 06 August 2017 - 11:56 AM

Old Twins Cap: No

  • ChiTownTwinsFan likes this

#48 stewthornley

stewthornley

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 06 August 2017 - 12:02 PM

spinowner: Regarding bottom of the sixth August 4 - that was my call.I went with hit based on the difficulty of the throw.Beltre made a nice backhand of a tricky hop.He was playing the grounder defensively, which can indictate he's having trouble with it.That doesn't mean he can't be charged with an error on the throw that followed (two parts to the play).He did pound the glove before the throw, which is a sign he's set, but he still didn't appear to be in a good position - feet not lined up directly toward first - and he threw a bit across the body from a low arm slot.He often throws from a low arm slot, so that could be ordinary effort for him.But I thought with a throw from that distance, I'd like to see him a little more set in the right alignment to consider it ordinary effort.Judgement call, and I went with hit.Thanks for asking.Good question.


#49 USAFChief

USAFChief

    ɹǝɯoפ

  • Twins Mods
  • 17,827 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 13 August 2017 - 09:13 AM

spinowner: Regarding bottom of the sixth August 4 - that was my call.I went with hit based on the difficulty of the throw.Beltre made a nice backhand of a tricky hop.He was playing the grounder defensively, which can indictate he's having trouble with it.That doesn't mean he can't be charged with an error on the throw that followed (two parts to the play).He did pound the glove before the throw, which is a sign he's set, but he still didn't appear to be in a good position - feet not lined up directly toward first - and he threw a bit across the body from a low arm slot.He often throws from a low arm slot, so that could be ordinary effort for him.But I thought with a throw from that distance, I'd like to see him a little more set in the right alignment to consider it ordinary effort.Judgement call, and I went with hit.Thanks for asking.Good question.


Stew...with all due respect...for me this answer sort of epitomizes why many of us have lost respect for what MLB wants from official scorers.

Because you essentially just said "that's a throw he should make, but he didn't."

That's an error.
  • spinowner likes this

I am not the paranoid you're looking for.