2012 MLB Season

[OnWis97]

I think the Gallaraga call probably plays into this call. The reaction to the Gallarga call was, to an extent, "you want to err the other way." In other words, perhaps this ump was scared to blow the no hitter on his call; he'd not want a one-hitter with the one hit being his screw up.

Other random thoughts:

• While this does put somewhat of a proverbial asterisk by it, I don't think it's that big of a deal...Santana pitched a solid game. Five walks and inches away from no hits. It's a far bigger travesty when a call changes the outcome of the game.
  
• I hope anyone up in arms over this call never defends a game won on bad calls by saying "they had all sorts of opportunities to win the game." The Cards had 26 other opportunities.
  
• It's ironic that the last two clubs to get a no-no (Mets/Padres) are NL clubs which get to face pitchers.
  
• I agree that reply should be explored but agree with Infrared that caution should be taken in how excited we get for it. I can think of at least one instance in college football in which the correct call was made on the field and reversed. Further, take this play. Ump calls it foul. Reply shows it's fair. Where is the hitter placed? I guess we have to project where he would have ended up. What if there are runners on base? Project them? Does it matter whether it's Matt Kemp or Prince Fielder? On occasion umps have to make those judgements on fan interference...those judgements being made with frequency would be a whole new headache. (This is similar to the whole "no reply if the whistle blows...which I know has changed some). Explore it, MLB...but make sure you get it right.
  

[omnivore]

I still feel awful for Gallarraga. But that Santana no-no, despite the chalk call was pretty good. I mean, those Mets played amazing defense behind him tonight.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/index.jsp?gid=2012_06_01_slnmlb_nynmlb_1&mode=recap&c_id=nym#

You watch the video and on most nights, there were easily half-a-dozen balls that would've fallen for hits that tonight were smothered by leather. The team coalesced and were just locked in tonight. It was a heck of a performance by the entire team tonight. Plus the chalk call is one of those where..on any other night, that call gets made and no one bats an eyelash. But given the stakes, it gets amplified.

I'll take a missed call like that over an overly generous strike 3 call anyday.

[ElwoodCuse]

Also I have to wonder about an issue with instant replay if it's put into place. I mean would it be an automatic double on a play like that? It's not like a ground rule play where it's a cut and dry play. It's a play that could easily be turned into a triple depending on the speed of the hitter(unless it's Bengie Molina where it would probably be a single)

We already have this with ground rules. Speedy guy on first, ball in the corner, dude could score easily but nope, it bounces over the wall and he's stuck on third.

MLB umpiring is a joke and big changes need to be made (fire a ton of crap umps, majorly expanded replay, etc.) but you just can't take anything away from the game Santana pitched.

[McCall]

I think the Gallaraga call probably plays into this call. The reaction to the Gallarga call was, to an extent, "you want to err the other way." In other words, perhaps this ump was scared to blow the no hitter on his call; he'd not want a one-hitter with the one hit being his screw up.

Other random thoughts:

• While this does put somewhat of a proverbial asterisk by it, I don't think it's that big of a deal...Santana pitched a solid game. Five walks and inches away from no hits. It's a far bigger travesty when a call changes the outcome of the game.
  
• I hope anyone up in arms over this call never defends a game won on bad calls by saying "they had all sorts of opportunities to win the game." The Cards had 26 other opportunities.
  
• It's ironic that the last two clubs to get a no-no (Mets/Padres) are NL clubs which get to face pitchers.
  
• I agree that reply should be explored but agree with Infrared that caution should be taken in how excited we get for it. I can think of at least one instance in college football in which the correct call was made on the field and reversed. Further, take this play. Ump calls it foul. Reply shows it's fair. Where is the hitter placed? I guess we have to project where he would have ended up. What if there are runners on base? Project them? Does it matter whether it's Matt Kemp or Prince Fielder? On occasion umps have to make those judgements on fan interference...those judgements being made with frequency would be a whole new headache. (This is similar to the whole "no reply if the whistle blows...which I know has changed some). Explore it, MLB...but make sure you get it right.
  

As far as your last point on replay, place the runner at first, I guess, with all other runners advancing one base? Don't know, but it's not really right to say, yeah it was fair, but you're still not getting the hit.

And btw, the call came in the top of the 6th, hardly on the cusp of being a no-hitter altering call, in a 2-run game at the time. Plus, the umpire was not far behind it looking right at the line. He should've easily made that call. He blew it, plain and simple. Yeah the Mets fans have the right to celebrate, but anybody else who says it was fair has a right to question it. Works both ways.

But of course, to everyone here, we're just a bunch of whining Cardinals fans anyway, so what's the point of even discussing it?

[cmm]

Had the ump called it fair, Beltran would have tripped over his shoelaces and would have been out at first anyway.

[njmeadowlanders]

Wow. We finally have ours. I'm still nervous five hours after the fact. Being a Met fan will never be the same.

[Cujo]

No one will take this no-hitter away from Johan! No one!!!

Not so fast. It appears "the best fans in baseball" have added an asterisk next to the feat.

[The_Admiral]

I would think that in order to avoid inventing what should've happened on a fair/foul play, you would have to have every questionable foul ball played out as if it were fair, review it, and then undo it if it had been foul all along. This, to me, seems so tedious that it would make the Ritual Consultation Dance Of The Boston Red Sox Battery that drags every game of theirs past three hours feel like a Mark Buehrle game. I'm in favor of as much replay as possible, as well as a consistent, automated strike zone*, but the way the game works means that sometimes you just have to resign yourself to a season's worth of mistakes evening out in the end. Baseball is almost perfect, but this is an aspect where it is not.

*If we're delegitimizing Santana's no-hitter for a borderline fair/foul call, think of all the ones we'll have to discard because the ump started giving the pitcher an ocean of a strike zone, yeesh.

[McCall]

Strike zones are judgmental in the sense that, while there's a definition to it, different guys are different sizes and have different stances. There's no defined line to go by. There is with fair/foul balls. There's a line that anyone can look at and determine without significant fail that the ball was either fair or foul.

[Breakwood]

But to counter that point. Every stadium is different. Would Dallas Braden have pitched his perfect game at another more hitter friendly ballpark? Does he get an asterix by his since the foul territory in Oakland is bigger than Delaware?

[infrared41]

But of course, to everyone here, we're just a bunch of whining Cardinals fans anyway, so what's the point of even discussing it?

Not for nothing but I like the Cardinals and their fans.

[McCall]

But to counter that point. Every stadium is different. Would Dallas Braden have pitched his perfect game at another more hitter friendly ballpark? Does he get an asterix by his since the foul territory in Oakland is bigger than Delaware?

Only in the outfield walls are the fair territory effected. The lines are at the same angle from home plate in every stadium. The ball last night, for instance, would've been the same no matter what ballpark.

[WSU151]

But to counter that point. Every stadium is different. Would Dallas Braden have pitched his perfect game at another more hitter friendly ballpark? Does he get an asterix by his since the foul territory in Oakland is bigger than Delaware?

I say no asterisk for Braden because Isn't that the nature of the game? Playing in ballparks with different quirks and dimensions? If you start bringing stuff like that into question, you could basically question every no hitter ever thrown.

[Breakwood]

But to counter that point. Every stadium is different. Would Dallas Braden have pitched his perfect game at another more hitter friendly ballpark? Does he get an asterix by his since the foul territory in Oakland is bigger than Delaware?

I say no asterisk for Braden because Isn't that the nature of the game? Playing in ballparks with different quirks and dimensions? If you start bringing stuff like that into question, you could basically question every no hitter ever thrown.

I totally agree. I was just playing Devil's Advocate.

[njmeadowlanders]

Anyone who says it's tainted can kiss my ass. Because nobody else has ever got a call going for or against them? This was the first one ever?

Oh and you moron Yankee fans, this was tainted and Jeffrey Maier wasn't because "it was different"? OK...

Also, unless you're a real Met fan, you just don't get it (well, unless you're a Padres fan I guess). You can't know, because there was never anything quite like it.

We have our memories of Championships and Pennants and Buckner and all that (obviously more important), but this was the one-freaking thing that eluded the Mets...and now we can all remember how cool it is for the demons to be exorcised.

[Sport]

Wow, Cardinals fans. Be more predictable.

[McCall]

Wow, Cardinals fans. Be more predictable.

Oh-Hi-O!

[raysox]

It happens. The Rays were no hit 3 times in a calendar year, two in a season they won the division. I was pissed, but it's part of baseball. Pitchers and Batters are on and off their games sometimes, that's part of the beauty of baseball. No one goes to a game saying that their pitcher WILL throw a no-hitter.

Plus, Edwin Jackson walked 8 and hit a batter in his. So 5 walks is no big deal.

One of the first thoughts I had was why there was a player in a pinstripe jersey celebrating! Then I realized that that guy is a douche and every time I see the highlight, I will see him.

[Kramerica Industries]

[cmm]

When the Cardinals place an asterisk next to their 2011 World Series title after Ron Kulpa's bad call in Game 3, the Mets will place an asterisk next to Johan's no-hitter.