MMO Roundtable: Mets No-Hit Appeal, Wright or Wrong?

33 Comments + Add Comment

• Alex68 June 15, 2012 at 10:03 am

  Quite frankly, we should move on from it.. To me it was an error, but again, who’s to say that had it being declare an error on the MVP that dickey was not gonna allow a hit during the game? the only reason this is being filed as an appeal is because that was the only hit in the game, if it wasn’t this would be a non issue.. and can someone please explain to me how is this throwing wright under the bus? some people need to get a grip and some clues while you at it.. Amazing.. just like when the man does not run ground outs right? if anyone say something about #5 they’re haters etc…
  • Hank June 15, 2012 at 10:36 am

    I’m not buying that this is throwing Wright under the bus; if it is then he needs to get tougher skin because he’s heard and will hear worse. I mean just ask Fred, and he’ll really throw Wright under the bus. To me, this makes Wright seem like less than a team player if he’s annoyed that he might get an error and the franchise might get their second no-hitter. Like really David?!?! One error is not going to cause you a Gold Glove and the contracted bonus. Actually Gold Glove people vote more on reputation that what the rest of us see, so I think you’re safe David.

    That said, this isn’t getting overturned. Collins did it because it’s what a manager has to do. You stand up for your ace and you take the shot in the dark. You store this up for the talk down the line, when you’re like R.A. you’re my guy, I’ll do anything for you, now go win 10 more games.
• USMF June 15, 2012 at 10:06 am

  I think the call could have gone either way..I don’t mind TC appealing the call…but it shouldn’t be over turned. It would cheapen the no hitter and wouldn’t be fair to Tampa and it’s players.

  I know that you’re supposed to play 110% on every play no matter the score, but Tampa was getting pounded and didn’t have a reason to believe that the game was winnable. If they were getting no hit, thing I can guarantee that they would have changed their approach to do anything they can to break up the no hitter.
• Laura June 15, 2012 at 10:08 am

  As a fan who was at that game…many sitting in my section at Third base (who were mostly Mets fans) felt it was an error. We were surprised when we looked up to see it was a hit. It was a tough play that happened VERY fast. Many of us wanted the Rays to get a legitimate hit so we didn’t have to live through what we are right now “Was it an error or was it a hit?” And if it’s overturned now it would lose a lot for the fans who were there. You could feel it in the air that it was a special night for RA Dickey and a 1-hitter is impressive…but if it’s a no-hitter I wanted to be there celebrating with the Mets at the very last out…not now…
  • Bayonne Mets Fan June 15, 2012 at 10:22 am

    Laura do you remember if Upton was dogging it in his usual style or did he run hard to 1B?
    • Laura June 15, 2012 at 10:34 am

      Wasn’t even paying attention to Upton running…was focused on Wright…
      • jessep June 15, 2012 at 10:38 am

        http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120614&content_id=33292436&notebook_id=33294738&vkey=notebook_nym&c_id=nym

        At :24 seconds and :32 seconds you can see Upton get out of the box. Frankly, we’ve all seen a player barely run out a groundball… his way of getting out of the box doesn’t tell me he was dogging it down the line. All Wright can see is how Upton gets out of the box before playing that ball.

        He barehanded it because he thought it was the only chance to get him at first which is why it was likely ruled a hit.
• srt June 15, 2012 at 10:10 am

  When I first saw the play go down, I thought it would be scored an error. Surprised it was scored a hit.

  I don’t have a problem with TC appealing on Dickey’s behalf. I also don’t think they’re going to change it. I know the official scorer does occasionally change their original decision days later but it’s not going to happen in this case, IMO.

  We all know the dominating performance Dickey had that game. That won’t change.
• Joey D. June 15, 2012 at 10:15 am

  At first I thought it was an error too, however, even though it deals with official scoring and not an umpire decision, if MLB overturns the ruling this can lead to other things as well – like St. Louis appealing the umpire decision on a fair/foul call (not safe or out) and thus taking away the no-hitter pitched by Johann two weeks back.

  What has R.A. said about this?
  • srt June 15, 2012 at 10:29 am

    I don’t think I’ve ever seen MLB overturn an umpire’s decision after that fact. Not even for that blown call on that Galarraga perfect game.
    • USMF June 15, 2012 at 10:59 am

      It happens from time to time…but usually teams don’t appeal or protest because a play we rarely get overturned and most teams don’t bother because it has little effect when looking at the big picture. That part of the reason why when teams do appeal, it doesn’t even come out as news…unless a the play effects the outcome of the game or history it’s not news.

      Every once and a great while, you’ll hear in the pregame of a “official scoring” get changed after the fact, witch will slightly change a BA or ERA, but it’s usually nothing more than a footnote.

      MLB won’t overturn a umpire ruling during the game because they have to maintain the integrity of the game and the authority of the umpiring of a game. If you start overturning calls after the fact, you open a bee’s hive of quality of the umpiring and the results of every game in history.

      If you over turn the 28 out perfect game call, then wouldn’t you have to overturn the blown call against the Royals in 85?

      The only call I can remember getting overturned was the Brett Pine Tar call

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_Tar_Incident
      • srt June 15, 2012 at 11:16 am

        Brett and the Pine Tar call……I completely forgot about that. Good memory.
  • Alex68 June 15, 2012 at 10:53 am

    On May 5, 1917, Ernie Koob of the St. Louis Browns threw a no hitter AFTER it was overturn by officials..

    The game story of the May 5, 1917 game between St. Louis and Chicago in the Chicago Sunday Tribune was written before a scoring decision on Buck Weaver’s first-inning grounder was changed from a hit to an error. Below is the headline from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

    Koob Headline

    The next day’s Chicago Tribune referred to the Koob situation in its report on the Groom no-hitter: “There was no flaw in Groom’s no-hit game. It was free from taint or suspicion which always will cling to the postmortem thing handed Koob yesterday by expunging a hit that had already been recorded.”

    Meanwhile, in response to the scoring reversal in Koob’s no-hitter, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran a story about a movement by St. Louis and Chicago baseball writers to “protect the official records of baseball from similar offenses in the future . . . to instruct all official scorers that their decisions cannot be reversed except in case of a misinterpretation of the rules. In other words, a hit scored in any inning cannot be wiped out any more than an umpire’s decision can be reversed after the game.”

    But whether or not official scorers are prohibited from altering a decision already handed down, they will continue to make subjective judgements, sometime difficult ones, in the course of their normal duties. Usually, only the scorers themselves will agonize over these calls.
    • jessep June 15, 2012 at 11:17 am

      nice find

      Back then the official scorer made the call though, so it is different than this.

      The other difference in the change was the game happened in St. Louis, so the scorekeeper was a hometown keeper.

      “Although official scorer J. B. Sheridan had credited Weaver with a hit at the time it occurred, he began second guessing himself as the game progressed. After the game, the Post-Dispatch’s O’Connor reported, Sheridan “sought sounder counsel from the umpires, the ballplayers and those who were better able to feel the pulse of the play in question.

      “To a man the Browns and the enemy and the umps agreed that Johnson deserved an error and Koob a no-hit game. There was the suspicion of gang ethics, here; but the able and honorable official scorer yielded reluctantly under the preponderance of evidence and erased the hit, substituting the error.”

      Exactly how long after the game it took Sheridan to reverse his decision is not clear. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch headline read, NO-HIT GAME NETS KOOB AND BROWNS ONE-RUN VICTORY: Weaver’s Drive in Opening Inning Was Scored a “Hit,” at First, but This Was Later Changed to an “Error.” But the Chicago Tribune headline, KOOB TAMES SOX IN ONE HIT GAME, 1-0, indicates that the play was still considered a hit at the time the Chicago reporter filed his story.”
• jessep June 15, 2012 at 10:34 am

  Dickey told Newsday

  “It would be weird. I don’t know if it would be quite as satisfying. I think the asterisk beside the no-hitter would get more attention than the no-hitter, you know? Plus, you’re not pitching the eighth, ninth inning with the pressure of a no-hitter going. It would be a little bit cheap. But, for the integrity of the game, I think it’s worthy of a review, just to make sure.”

  And to MLB Net

  “A part of me would love a no-hitter,” said Dickey, who pitched two no-hitters in high school but none since then. “Regardless of how you get it, it’s still a no-hitter. And then a part of me thinks it would be cheap.”

  The part about the “pressures of throwing the no hitter throughout the game” is exactly why it won’t be overturned, why its cheap if it does and why Dickey’s performance while great… was not better than Johan’s no hitter.
  • Laura June 15, 2012 at 10:49 am

    I would have to partially disagree about Dickey’s performance not being better than Johan’s no-hitter…in my opinion Dickey was far more dominant in Wednesday’s game. No one could touch what he was throwing and Dickey was spot on with his pitches. Dickey had a higher strikes to balls ratio, 12 strikeouts and no walks compared to Johan’s totals. I think it’s very close but Johan will always be remembered for his performance because it was the no-hitter…
    • jessep June 15, 2012 at 11:11 am

      Laura,

      I by no means am suggesting Dickey’s statistics and actual pitch by pitch was better than Johan’s.

      As discussed here thought http://metsmerizedonline.com/2012/06/dickeys-performance-was-the-best-by-a-met-all-year.html

      Dickey’s outing didn’t come close to matching the pressure Santana had to deal with. Upton’s hit was in the 1st inning. For the next 25 outs, Dickey didn’t have nearly as much pressure on him as Johan did for the entire 27.

      Johan had to deal with: Surgically repaired shoulder, convincing manager to let him pitch, home town crowd, 51 seasons of it never happening, had to bat, had the pressure of 1 tiny little mistake and it’s all gone… plus defenders play different with history on the lie. One player doesn’t handle the pressure the right way, boom… gone.

      There are so many intangibles with throwing a no hitter or perfect game that you can’t compare it to just a great pitched game.
      • Mr North Jersey June 15, 2012 at 11:15 am

        Why can’t you compare it? where do I find this? Look you want to say Santana’s start was more dominant? OK but do me a favor and let’s not start saying what should or shouldn’t be compared.
        • jessep June 15, 2012 at 11:59 am

          Oh I’m saying you can’t compare them.

          You cannot compare the amount of pressure with each pitch Johan threw compared to RA Dickey’s performance with 25 outs to go and a hit on the board.

          They are different. The atmosphere is different, the communication with the team and manager is different, the players act differently in the field, the pitcher can make a mistake by being too careful.

          It’s all different.

          HISTORY was on the line for Johan Santana. What was on the line for RA Dickey? 10th win? Not historical sorry.
          • Mr North Jersey June 15, 2012 at 12:18 pm

            I tell you what, the things mentioned about Santana’s start are what make it not just special but one of the great moments on Mets history. Nothing will ever change that for anyone that watched that game which I for one did. Yet taking all that into account even though you may feel it can’t be compared for the reasons you stated I felt instinctively having seen both performances that Dickey’s as far as a pitcher vs a opponent was more dominant.

            I understand you feel otherwise and that’s all well and good but when it comes to saying what can and can’t be compared in this case we will have to agree to disagree. Dickey’s performance while not as memorable or historically significant when I view it as a pitcher’s dominance of his opponent was the best i seen by a Met all year.
            • Metsie June 15, 2012 at 12:38 pm

              Dickey pitched the better game no doubt about it!

              Santana 0 H* 5 BB 8 K 134 Pit 77 Str 38 Sctc 21 Slook
              Dickey 1 H* 0 BB 12 K 106 Pit 79 Str 43 Sctc 14 Slook

              But thats why we often remind people Baseball is a Team Sport!
      • Laura June 15, 2012 at 11:32 am

        I’m not going to argue with you but to think that Dickey had no pressure Wednesday night you are mistaken…and it sure felt like being in Citi Field Wednesday at Tropicana Field…the place was PACKED with Mets fans…and obviously Dickey has his own story of coming out from baseball despair and never imagined to be where he is now…So you can try to add all those things to help say Johan’s performance on 6/1/12 was better than Dickey’s 6/13/12 performance…but from a pitching standpoint Dickey was far more dominant and has been all season in my opinion over Johan…
        • jessep June 15, 2012 at 12:03 pm

          Laura I do not doubt the atmosphere included Mets fans but I’m sorry the pressure in front of a home crowd with 0 no hitters in history is different than a road game, 1 hitter with mets fans in the building

          Tampa had 18,496 tickets sold for that game. The Mets had over 8,000 more tickets sold for the Johan game.

          I can guarantee you that of the 18,000+ a decent enough amount of TB fans were there to create less of a Mets buzz than Johan’s game.

          The stats favor Dickey. I don’t dispute that. But the moment favors Johan, and the moment is what made the performance electric and historical. Dickey didn’t have any of that pressure to deal with.

          I think he will one day to be honest, but it wasn’t on Wednesday
• Mr North Jersey June 15, 2012 at 10:59 am

  To call that an error you have to assume that Wright once he made the decision to bare hand that ball he should of done so routinely and while he is good at that it is by far a routine play.

  Therefore you don’t award a error there. As far as Upton is concerned Wright already said that watching the play as it developed in front of him he did not think he could of thrown him out had he tried to glove the ball. We can try to speculate that he could of but I will give the benefit of the doubt to the one that actually has to make the play.

  Regarding the reversal I wish Collins hadn’t decided to try to do so. I can understand the argument he is trying to go show his starter that he will fight for him but in this case winning an after the fact n0-hitter may not be the best way to show it. Also adding that I can’t recall a manager ever asking baseball to award an error to his own player. Collins when all was said and done should of just left it alone in my opinion.
• Metfan Lou June 15, 2012 at 11:42 am

  I think the call should stand BUT I wonder if this exact play happened with two out in the ninth would he have called it a hit? If the scorer can answer that with integrity then rule that way. Over the years barehanded balls where the runner is safe when the fielder can’t field cleanly usually goes for a hit so this isn’t that much different.
• theBigo68 June 15, 2012 at 11:57 am

  Someone could make a case that Wright consulted his Magic * ball before the game and asked if Dickey would throw a no-hitter. When it came up “maybe”, he chose to flub the play when he saw how far down the line Upton was, and hoping to get an error.

  Ok, that’s simply ridiculous but when do players typically try to bare hand a ball? When they know the play cannot be made using the glove and they’re saving that time. If that’s the case then it should have been ruled a hit. Because it’s such a difficult play, regardless of how good a defensive player Wright is, it needed to be scored a hit.
• Metsie June 15, 2012 at 12:12 pm

  I just don’t see what they hope to accomplish with the appeal…
  I wonder what everyone would say if the Cards appealed Santana’s No Hitter?

  The way Dickey is pitching he might just throw a no hitter the very next game!

  So let it serve as fair waring to the fielders!
  • Claudia June 15, 2012 at 3:33 pm

    good point.
• Russell Zanca June 15, 2012 at 2:08 pm

  I hope the ruling is upheld. Really can’t say definitely hit or error, and so many calls go either way on these that often seem more maddening than this one.

  I will say I’m a little surprised by the preoccupation on the part of some about getting out of the box. Running hard up the 1B line is another matter. Depending on how much BB any of you has ever played, you might know that factors such as stances, final position on a swing, and a player’s basic mechanics have to do with the ability to explode once a hitter makes contact and realizes the ball is in play and that he must run. I hear the running down of Upton on this point, but one would really have to observe each at bat, contact, etc. to say he consistently “dogs” it getting out of the box.

  At baseball camps, we were always told you could never hope to make it as a MLB player without having good speed to 1B, so dogging it seems far-fetched (no pun intended ).
• Claudia June 15, 2012 at 3:32 pm

  As I was watching the play as it happened on tv, I immediately thought it was an error and quite frankly didn’t think it would be a hit. Yeah Upton is pretty fast, but knowing Wright I think he could’ve made the play- but we’ll never know. It’s a complicated situation cause yeah it would be nice to have two no hitters, but it won’t be the same anyway. Because looking back Dickey won’t think “I threw a no hitter” . he will most likely remember the circumstances around it. It just wont be the same and I dont think anyone will look back and think yeah Dickey threw a no hitter, just not the same as Santana’s. I think it was an error though.
  • jessep June 15, 2012 at 3:34 pm

    hey Claudia, I guess you gotta also consider it was in Tampa. You know Wright makes those plays, the scorekeeper in TB has to assume all players are equal.

    If that game was at Citi Field it would have been an E. And then TB fans could make an argument that it shoulda been a hit. The beauty of the game.

    I believe Dickey will have a moment in his career where he doesn’t need an appeal to get a no hitter
• Dickey One-Hitter Ruling Upheld By MLB - New-York-Mets.fans-talk.com June 15, 2012 at 5:00 pm

  [...] Earlier today, writers here at MMO gave their take on the situation in a roundtable. Check it out. [...]
• Dickey One-Hitter Ruling Upheld By MLB | MLB.Fans-Talk.com June 16, 2012 at 10:24 am

  [...] Earlier today, writers here at MMO gave their take on the situation in a roundtable. Check it out. [...]