I'm all for changing it to an error as long as he also gives Galarraga his perfect game and takes away Santana's no hitter.

9beers: I'm all for changing it to an error as long as he also gives Galarraga his perfect game and takes away Santana's no hitter.

Read the article. It clearly says they can overturn decisions from the official scorer. Umpire calls are final and can't be overturned after the fact (since they'd have to replay the game from after that point and you'd be doing that 500 times a year, probably)

And the dugout clears during... team breakfast, maybe?

So the Mets have thrown two one-hitters in two weeks?

Gosling: And the dugout clears during... team breakfast, maybe?

No, Josh Thole visits Dickey's hotel room in full gear after curfew to have a replay of this magic moment:



Come on Josh, give him a reach around.

I wish we could see the play in question Baseball tonight....
How long does it take them to over turn these things? I've seen them overturned and i think it's usually only a day or two.

Any time a Rule 5 journeyman knuckleballer throws a 1 hitter, it should be scored an error.

That's a call that can go either way. I don't think you overturn it - I think if you're going to change the official scorer's ruling, it should be for something definitive.

99 times out of 100, David Wright makes that play. It's a difficult play, though, and Upton is pretty quick to first base, so he might have beat it out even if Wright did field the ball cleanly. I think the Mets have a case, but I doubt they'll change the scoring.

Schmee: 99 times out of 100, David Wright makes that play. It's a difficult play, though, and Upton is pretty quick to first base, so he might have beat it out even if Wright did field the ball cleanly. I think the Mets have a case, but I doubt they'll change the scoring.

The funny thing is that the only other baserunner was a result of Wright botching a throw. So really, Dickey faced 29 batters and pitched well enough to potentially generate outs on all 29 of them.

/I just want to see a knuckleballer start the All-Star game for once
//10-1 with an ERA, FIP, & xFIP all under 3.00

Schmee: 99 times out of 100, David Wright makes that play. It's a difficult play, though, and Upton is pretty quick to first base, so he might have beat it out even if Wright did field the ball cleanly. I think the Mets have a case, but I doubt they'll change the scoring.

Except on the one that mattered most. Chokers are like that.

desertgeek: 9beers: I'm all for changing it to an error as long as he also gives Galarraga his perfect game and takes away Santana's no hitter.

Read the article. It clearly says they can overturn decisions from the official scorer. Umpire calls are final and can't be overturned after the fact (since they'd have to replay the game from after that point and you'd be doing that 500 times a year, probably)

You don't have to replay anything when there's two outs in the ninth and the missed call would have ended the game. You also have the umpire on record saying that he made the wrong call. Selig most certainly has the power to overturn a call, he's just a dick.

Is there anywhere online you can see the play?

In general I am opposed to changing it after the fact unless it is a blatant mistake.

If the Mets had gone on to lose the game 10-9, would they still appeal this call? If the answer is 'no', they should just stop wasting everybody's time right now.

Maybe I would have been on board before the run in the ninth. I consider a non-shutout no-hitter a much lesser accomplishment.

/note to sportswriters: don't say this would have been the Mets' second no-no
//no-no means "no hits, no runs"

skrame: If the Mets had gone on to lose the game 10-9, would they still appeal this call? If the answer is 'no', they should just stop wasting everybody's time right now.

Perhaps. If the call meant the difference between 9 earned runs and 9 unearned runs, they may well have.

The real question, though, is whether MLB would evaluate the appeal any differently than they would have had it come in a 10-9 game.

skrame: If the Mets had gone on to lose the game 10-9, would they still appeal this call? If the answer is 'no', they should just stop wasting everybody's time right now.

Yeah, they're doing a lot of important things in the MLB offices that are crucial to...well, anything.

jimpoz: The real question, though, is whether MLB would evaluate the appeal any differently than they would have had it come in a 10-9 game.

Oddly, they're probably more likely to deny it because it would result in a no-hitter.

I actually lean in the direction of calling it a hit. Very tough play. Any kind of burden of proof makes the appeal a nonstarter in my view. Nevertheless, this was an incredible outing - one hit, 12 strikeouts, no walks. More impressive than Santanta's no-hitter, even ignoring the Beltran call. Damn shame it was only the second-best pitching performance of the night.

I love that Dickey is having such a solid year, but fark you, Mets. You either trust the official scorer or you don't.

zarberg: I love that Dickey is having such a solid year, but fark you, Mets. You either trust the official scorer or you don't.

Not to mention that Dickey would have conceivably pitched differently under the pressure of a potential no-hitter.

Incontrovertible proof that C.C. Sabathia threw a no-hitter for the Brewers on August 31, 2008.

It's still real to me, dammint


///QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ. Worst scoring decision ever. As someone upthread said, Galarraga was much more devastating and egregious, but could not be overturned. C.C. picked up the ball with LaRoche not even halfway down the line then FREAKING DROPPED IT. HOW IS THAT NOT AN ERROR, YOU MISERABLE EXCUSE FOR A DOG TURD?

Ima10urin8: Dickey said he doesnt want a no hitter with an asterisk. He wants to leave it as a one hitter.

While I respect the sentiment of what he means, that is moronic. There is no asterisk if the decision is overturned because the final ruling is the only ruling. Having not seen the hit in question, I cannot provide an opinion on whether the ruled hit was a hit, but if it was not, then Dickey should get his due.

//I would be more than happy to provide my opinion on the C.C. Sabathia error against the Pirates on 8/31/08, again.

Found the real video this time. Someone call the cops because MLB has video evidence of the scorer stealing a no-hitter from C.C. Sabathia: Travesty

//I may need a life

The Mets' site has video of the play, but it only shows 5 different angles of Wright muffing the play. None of them show where Upton was in relation to first base, so you really can't make a judgement as to whether he would have beat it out or not, at least not from the video available there. I'd have to see a wide shot that covered the whole infield, and I haven't been able to find that.

Generation_D: Schmee: 99 times out of 100, David Wright makes that play. It's a difficult play, though, and Upton is pretty quick to first base, so he might have beat it out even if Wright did field the ball cleanly. I think the Mets have a case, but I doubt they'll change the scoring.

Except on the one that mattered most. Chokers are like that.

The play itself was inconsequential, except in the context of the no-hitter. The Mets won the game by a large margin.

Schmee: The Mets' site has video of the play, but it only shows 5 different angles of Wright muffing the play. None of them show where Upton was in relation to first base, so you really can't make a judgement as to whether he would have beat it out or not, at least not from the video available there. I'd have to see a wide shot that covered the whole infield, and I haven't been able to find that.

oh that's a toughey. the ball hit the edge of the infield to throw the bounce off course. I want to say no hitter, but that's just a tough break that won't get overturned.

CC Sabathia had a similar situation with the Brewers back in '08, against the Pirates. They didn't change the call.

thecpt: Schmee: The Mets' site has video of the play, but it only shows 5 different angles of Wright muffing the play. None of them show where Upton was in relation to first base, so you really can't make a judgement as to whether he would have beat it out or not, at least not from the video available there. I'd have to see a wide shot that covered the whole infield, and I haven't been able to find that.

oh that's a toughey. the ball hit the edge of the infield to throw the bounce off course. I want to say no hitter, but that's just a tough break that won't get overturned.

Oh, I'm quite sure they won't overturn it, too. After waiting 50 years (I was born the same year as the Mets), I guess I'm a little greedy.

thecpt: oh that's a toughey. the ball hit the edge of the infield to throw the bounce off course. I want to say no hitter, but that's just a tough break that won't get overturned.

They all said that, even the Mets. But it's one of those things where you'd be a sh*tty organization if you didn't at least try to get it overturned for your pitcher. The worst they can do is say no and leave things where they stand.

IAmRight: thecpt: oh that's a toughey. the ball hit the edge of the infield to throw the bounce off course. I want to say no hitter, but that's just a tough break that won't get overturned.

They all said that, even the Mets. But it's one of those things where you'd be a sh*tty organization if you didn't at least try to get it overturned for your pitcher. The worst they can do is say no and leave things where they stand.

It won't get overturned, but what's the point if it did? No one would consider it a real no-hitter and I'm not sure Dickey nor any other pitcher would even want that. Like I mentioned earlier, pitching in the late innings with a no-hitter on the line is a lot different than with a hit already given up earlier. It's not like this happened with two down in the ninth. This "hit" occurred in the first inning.

Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu:
It won't get overturned, but what's the point if it did? No one would consider it a real no-hitter and I'm not sure Dickey nor any other pitcher would even want that. Like I mentioned earlier, pitching in the late innings with a no-hitter on the line is a lot different than with a hit already given up earlier. It's not like this happened with two down in the ninth. This "hit" occurred in the first inning.

I understand your logic, but I think it can also act the other way. Worked for No-han that there wasn't one in the hit column. I was at that game and he was taking risks that I don't think he would have done if there was one in the hit column (back to back change-ups with 130 pitches already). You're right to say the pressure would be completely different, but who is to say that wouldn't have been to Dickey's benefit? Good for the Mets for taking a stab at it, and class act sportmanship from everyone all around on this one.

"We're just taking a shot. We're just taking a stab. What the heck?"

You know, I really farking hate it when people try to turn sports into some kind of shining example of morality and life lessons. Nothing makes me stabbier than when an SEC football coach making a million dollars a year gets all misty-eyed for the cameras about how all that matters is the chance to instill values in the fine young men they're privileged to serve yadda yadda yadda.

But Jesus Farking Christ, this is just awful. Who are the Mets going to get to handle the appeal--Saul from Breaking Bad, or Maurice from The Wire? I'll bet Dickey is sending urgent e-mails to the Commissioner's Office begging them to ignore this. I feel bad for him. He's tarnished even by having someone else ask.

Also, if we're going to go around opening up this can of worms, we should probably take a look at all the times that a third baseman, late in a no-hitter, charged a sure-fire infield single and "accidentally" threw it into the stands.

If this exact same hit had happened in the 8th inning instead of the 1st, you better believe David Wright would have bobbled it seven times, thrown it behind his head, slipped on the ball, and split his pants, all the while shouting, "Oh, no, E-5, how embarrassing!"

semiotix: If this exact same hit had happened in the 8th inning instead of the 1st, you better believe David Wright would have bobbled it seven times, thrown it behind his head, slipped on the ball, and split his pants, all the while shouting, "Oh, no, E-5, how embarrassing!"

That's tough. Let's see how other third basemen would handle it:

A-Rod would be too busy thinking about his post-game spray tan appointment and daydreaming about looking at himself in the mirror.

Adrian Beltre would be too worried about the ball hitting him in the nads and checking to see if he had actually remembered to wear a cup that day.

Hanley Ramirez might actually make that play, but then after the game he'd use that as an excuse as to why he should be playing shortstop and demand a raise.

Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: No one would consider it a real no-hitter

Sure they would. It's not like 99.9% of people remember stupid details years later. No one would've batted an eye at it being called a no-hitter if it were ruled an error initially.

semiotix: But Jesus Farking Christ, this is just awful. Who are the Mets going to get to handle the appeal--Saul from Breaking Bad, or Maurice from The Wire? I'll bet Dickey is sending urgent e-mails to the Commissioner's Office begging them to ignore this. I feel bad for him. He's tarnished even by having someone else ask.

Are you insane? It's not like it takes a whole lot to file the appeal. It's no different than a manager going out there and arguing on behalf of a player who thinks he's safe, even if the manager knows he was out. You gotta at least challenge the ruling to help your guys out.

I want Selig to reverse it just for the shiat storm.

Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: IAmRight: thecpt: ***snip***
1. It won't get overturned, but what's the point if it did?

2. No one would consider it a real no-hitter and I'm not sure Dickey nor any other pitcher would even want that.

3. Like I mentioned earlier, pitching in the late innings with a no-hitter on the line is a lot different than with a hit already given up earlier. It's not like this happened with two down in the ninth. This "hit" occurred in the first inning.

1. The point is that Dickey would be on the select list of pitchers who have thrown a no hitter.

2. Why would it not be considered a "real" no hitter? Let's see, "Did R.A. Dickey give up any hits during the game he pitched on 6/13/12? No? Well, then it must have been a no hitter. But the scoring decision was changed after the game ended because it was WRONG. Ya, and they made it right. Sucks that the Galarraga call can't be overturned since it was made by an ump rather than an official scorer."

3. Is it different from the perspective of the pitcher? Absolutely, totally agree with you.
Is it different from the perspective of the batters? Highly doubtful, as the goal is to score runs rather than avoid being no hit. The difference between one hit and no runs and no hits and no runs is inconsequential to the losing team.

roc6783: Is it different from the perspective of the batters? Highly doubtful, as the goal is to score runs rather than avoid being no hit. The difference between one hit and no runs and no hits and no runs is inconsequential to the losing team.

I mean, Upton and Wright might be upset that numbers go against them. But they'll be over it by the end of the week.

semiotix: Also, if we're going to go around opening up this can of worms, we should probably take a look at all the times that a third baseman, late in a no-hitter, charged a sure-fire infield single and "accidentally" threw it into the stands.

If this exact same hit had happened in the 8th inning instead of the 1st, you better believe David Wright would have bobbled it seven times, thrown it behind his head, slipped on the ball, and split his pants, all the while shouting, "Oh, no, E-5, how embarrassing!"

Are you aware that even on an obvious error, the scorer can call it a hit, regardless of the fielder's antics?

IAmRight: roc6783: Is it different from the perspective of the batters? Highly doubtful, as the goal is to score runs rather than avoid being no hit. The difference between one hit and no runs and no hits and no runs is inconsequential to the losing team.

I mean, Upton and Wright might be upset that numbers go against them. But they'll be over it by the end of the week.

Do you really think (no seriously, not being snarky) that top level MLB players, i.e. not guys who are called up for a spot start or fighting to make a roster, would really care if that was called an error for longer than it took the next guy to get in the batter's box?


//Also, I was trying to decide between posting the previous pic and this one. Figured it was like trying to choose between Dunkin Donuts and Krispy Kreme, so I made the only logical choice.

roc6783: Are you aware that even on an obvious error, the scorer can call it a hit, regardless of the fielder's antics?

Oh sure. But that usually happens when the throw goes wide three seconds after the runner has crossed first base. In practice, a fielder can turn a bunt single into an error if he's so inclined, especially if the official scorer kinda wants to see a no-hitter himself. That goes double for home games. Technically the league hires the scorer, but they follow the recommendation of the home team, and he's functionally just another team employee.

roc6783: Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: IAmRight: thecpt: ***snip***
1. It won't get overturned, but what's the point if it did?

2. No one would consider it a real no-hitter and I'm not sure Dickey nor any other pitcher would even want that.

3. Like I mentioned earlier, pitching in the late innings with a no-hitter on the line is a lot different than with a hit already given up earlier. It's not like this happened with two down in the ninth. This "hit" occurred in the first inning.

1. The point is that Dickey would be on the select list of pitchers who have thrown a no hitter.

2. Why would it not be considered a "real" no hitter? Let's see, "Did R.A. Dickey give up any hits during the game he pitched on 6/13/12? No? Well, then it must have been a no hitter. But the scoring decision was changed after the game ended because it was WRONG. Ya, and they made it right. Sucks that the Galarraga call can't be overturned since it was made by an ump rather than an official scorer."

3. Is it different from the perspective of the pitcher? Absolutely, totally agree with you.
Is it different from the perspective of the batters? Highly doubtful, as the goal is to score runs rather than avoid being no hit. The difference between one hit and no runs and no hits and no runs is inconsequential to the losing team.

Technically, he would have pitched a no-hitter by the very definition of the term but I think many would agree that a no-hitter is also about the moment. The anticipation building from the 6th inning on. Teammates isolating the pitcher to the end of the bench in between innings. Fans, players, etc. hanging onto each pitch. Players rushing the mound after the last out. None of this exists when we award it retroactively, especially on such a subjective call.

I also think the perspective is just as different to the opposing offense as it is to the pitcher. Obviously the pitcher is under more stress to remain "perfect" but the batters feel it too. Again, the atmosphere that this moment creates affects everyone in that stadium. And while he certainly could have gone on to complete the no-hitter had it been called an error from the start, I think it's a bit foolish to just assume it would have resulted the same when we've seen so many more fail under that same pressure.

roc6783: would really care if that was called an error for longer than it took the next guy to get in the batter's box?

He didn't seem too happy about the idea, which is why I gave it a week.

/also, if it costs him some weird performance bonus wherein it's something like "if you have fewer than 10 errors in the season, you get an extra $100K" or for Upton, "if you hit .300 in a season, you get $300K" and they lost out on that by one each, then yeah, they'd be upset for longer

As a Mets fan I'm just happy Dickey is doing so well this year. After a very mediocre season (8-13 even though he had very good ERA (3.28)) last year he is just lights out. First pitcher to 10 wins, 12 out of 13 quality starts, averaging a strikeout every inning, and a walk every 5 innings or so (which is pretty darn good for a knuckleballer). I can't remember the last time the Mets had a pitcher that was this consistently good. The best part is he is unlikely to blowout an elbow or shoulder with his technique.

He is a major reason they have a chance at the division this year (at least before their End of Season Collapse (patent pending)).

Plus he has a pretty great story. A middle of the road pitcher that recognized his shortcomings and worked to better himself. Bounced around a bunch of teams and AAA clubs before getting a chance with the Mets. What's not the like about that?