The Mets are appealing a scoring decision to try to get R.A. Dickey a no-hitter. They will lose.

33 Comments

Lost in the Matt Cain perfect game drama last night was the fact that R.A. Dickey nearly threw a no-hitter of his own. The only blemish: a first inning infield single by B.J. Upton. It was a slow-rolling grounder that Wright tried to barehand and couldn’t.  The Mets, however, are trying to get that single changed to an error via an appeal of the scoring decision.

This seems doomed to failure.  Click the pic to watch the play:

source:

I think that’s called a hit almost every single time.

This is not unprecedented, by the way. Reader Jess Lemont reminds me that in 2008, the Brewers appealed a scorer’s decision to give Pirates third baseman Andy LaRoche a hit in a CC Sabathia one-hitter. There, as here, the call came when the fielder — who was actually Sabathia —  failed to pick up a ball on a barehand attempt.  Here was the text of the ruling from MLB:

“The committee held an extensive and constructive decision after viewing footage of the play in question and considered the documentation presented by the Brewers. It was the collective decision of the committee that the judgment of the scorer was not ‘clearly erroneous,’ which is the standard set forth in Official Scoring Rule 10.01(a), and thus did not meet the criteria for League reversal of the call made by Official Scorer Bob Webb.”

“Clearly erroneous” is a high standard to meet and there is no way that the call on Wright’s play was that. It’s often called a hit. Most of the time, I’d guess, with the scorer’s reasoning presumably being that if the fielder had to go with a barehand play in order to make it, it was damn close to begin with.

So it’s great that the Mets are sticking up for their guy, but in this case I don’t think it’s going to be successful.

Oh, and a final note: I don’t think some of the “oh isn’t it rich that the Mets are doing this given the bad call that gave Johan Santana his no-no” comments I’ve seen on Twitter since last night are particularly on point. There’s a difference in my view between a judgment call by a scorer and a missed call by an ump. Scorer’s decisions do get overturned quite often and, to be honest, are more often wrong than the umps on the field are.

The upshot: the Mets aren’t hypocrites for doing this. They’re just not going to be successful.

Javier Baez, D.J. LeMahieu have disagreement about sign-stealing

Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images
19 Comments

Fellow second basemen Javier Baez of the Cubs and D.J. LeMahieu of the Rockies got into a disagreement in the top of the third inning of Sunday’s game at Coors Field over sign-stealing.

LeMahieu reached on a fielder’s choice ground out, then advanced to second base on Charlie Blackmon‘s single. While Nolan Arenado and Trevor Story were batting, Baez was concerned that LeMahieu was relaying the Cubs’ signs to his teammates. Baez decided to stand in front of LeMahieu to block any information he might have been giving to Arenado and Story. LeMahieu got irritated and the two jawed at each other for a bit. Umpires Vic Carapazza and Greg Gibson had to intervene to tell Baez to knock it off.

There has always been a back-and-forth with alleged sign-stealing. As long as teams aren’t using technology to steal signs, it’s fair game for players to relay information to their teammates about the opposing team’s signs. Last year, MLB determined the Red Sox went against the rules and used technology — an Apple watch in this case — to steal signs from the Yankees. Other teams in the past have been accused of using binoculars from the bullpen to steal signs. In this particular case with Baez and LeMahieu, there was no foul play going on, just Baez trying to make the Rockies cede what he perceived to be their slight competitive advantage.

The Cubs went on to beat the Rockies 9-7 on Sunday.