earned or unearned run

If things were EXACTLY as you described them, the run would be UE. Everything would ride on the ball to right. Some scorers get right down to it and take into account the “wheels” of the runner who scored, and if he would have scored if he was still on 3rd.

The thing is, with ERs the scorer is supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the pitcher, not beat him up over it, so most scorers tend to be pretty lenient when given the chance.

Okay you're talking about the pop fly to right that couldn't be tagged on. Runner went back to bag and drew the throw from right, probably just to see if it got away from catcher. Throw on target, runner went back.

Regarding scorekeepers judging a runners wheels, It's either a pop fly out or a sac fly. We just mark down what happens. It's not our job to judge who is on base.

Since there was a runner on third on the fly ball to right who didn't score, I'd use that as my guideline in reconstructing the inning as if the sacrifice bunt had been played properly and the out recorded at first and everything else went as you said.

Unearned.

Let me put a wrinkle in this same situation in a different game. Runner on third with a ball hit to left. Runner tags up and breaks for home with the catch but stops his run to see what happens with the throw. Throw short hops catcher and bounces away where the pitcher was unable to back it up. Runner hustles home. I still scored this as a fly out and runner scoring on the error, he clearly was not committed to going home unless something happened like it did.

quote:

Originally posted by OK Heat:
…Regarding scorekeepers judging a runners wheels, It's either a pop fly out or a sac fly. We just mark down what happens. It's not our job to judge who is on base.

That’s your definition of what a scorer s supposed to do, but it may not be mine or JMoff’s, and that’s where there’s a lot of leeway in what happens. There’s absolutely nothing I can think of that precludes a scorer from considering who the runners are. I wouldn’t do it, but then again, there are a few other scorers runnin’ around beside me.

quote:

Originally posted by OK Heat:
Let me put a wrinkle in this same situation in a different game. Runner on third with a ball hit to left. Runner tags up and breaks for home with the catch but stops his run to see what happens with the throw. Throw short hops catcher and bounces away where the pitcher was unable to back it up. Runner hustles home. I still scored this as a fly out and runner scoring on the error, he clearly was not committed to going home unless something happened like it did.

Here again, if things were exactly as described, I agree. But, its still a judgment call, and if the scorer for the other team judged it differently, it doesn’t make him wrong. After all, he may not have noticed the runner stop because he was looking at the play in the OF, or he may have heard the 3B coach screaming for him to go. But the whole thing is, as long as the scorer used his best judgment to get the play correct, there’s really nothing anyone can do.

That’s a perfect scenario for why there are 3 books for every HS game. There’s a home book, a visitors book, and the official book, and the numbers generated from each will very likely be different.

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:

quote:

Originally posted by OK Heat:
…Regarding scorekeepers judging a runners wheels, It's either a pop fly out or a sac fly. We just mark down what happens. It's not our job to judge who is on base.

That’s your definition of what a scorer s supposed to do, but it may not be mine or JMoff’s, and that’s where there’s a lot of leeway in what happens. There’s absolutely nothing I can think of that precludes a scorer from considering who the runners are. I wouldn’t do it, but then again, there are a few other scorers runnin’ around beside me.

quote:

Originally posted by OK Heat:
Let me put a wrinkle in this same situation in a different game. Runner on third with a ball hit to left. Runner tags up and breaks for home with the catch but stops his run to see what happens with the throw. Throw short hops catcher and bounces away where the pitcher was unable to back it up. Runner hustles home. I still scored this as a fly out and runner scoring on the error, he clearly was not committed to going home unless something happened like it did.

Here again, if things were exactly as described, I agree. But, its still a judgment call, and if the scorer for the other team judged it differently, it doesn’t make him wrong. After all, he may not have noticed the runner stop because he was looking at the play in the OF, or he may have heard the 3B coach screaming for him to go. But the whole thing is, as long as the scorer used his best judgment to get the play correct, there’s really nothing anyone can do.

That’s a perfect scenario for why there are 3 books for every HS game. There’s a home book, a visitors book, and the official book, and the numbers generated from each will very likely be different.

Yes there are situations that are judgement calls that SK have to make. Hit or error comes to mind. And yes sometimes a players speed does come into play on judgement calls like the close play at first that pulls the first baseman off the bag. Many times a hit is given because the runner appears to beat the throw so you judge that he would have been safe even if the throw had been on target. A slow runner probably reaches by error in this situation.

The situation regarding the sac fly is not a judgement call. If he tags and goes and slides in, he's either out of safe. I really don't see how the other scorekeeper could score it any other way. You mentioned something about him watching the catch and not seeing the runner go back. Obviously he isn't paying very close attention and should consider verifying with other more observant eyes before his final scoring decision.

Let me wrinkle the situation once more. Lets say the runner breaks for home after the catch and goes 60 feet and decides he isn't going to make it and gets in a run down between 3rd and home. After several throws without a dropped ball, races by the player covering home and scores. Are you gonna call this a sac fly? I'm not. I say fielder's choice. How about the batter, does he get an RBI?

What if a throw goes bad during the run down and the batter scores? Still not a Sac Fly for me. Scores on the error.

OK,

I didn’t say anything at all about not seeing “the runner go back”. I said, “…he may not have noticed the runner stop…”. You set up the scenario where the runner stopped, then didn’t proceed until the throw had gone bad. Let me try to explain what I was trying to get across.

Runner on 3rd with less than 2 outs. Scorer is sitting to the right of the 1st base dugout, or in the 1st base dugout. On a fly ball to short RF, where’s the scorer more than likely gonna be focused? On the runner or on the fielder? If he’s doing his primary job, he better be focused on that fielder, and if he is, how likely is it that he’s noticed the runner stop? When the throw goes bad, he may or may not notice the runner being stopped.

Now move the scorer over to the 3rd base side between the backstop and the 3rd base dugout. Even if he stares at the fielder, the runner is still gonna be directly in his field of vision. So, what was obvious to one scorer, was at least questionable by the other.

There are times when I ask for help, but there’s no way I’d ask someone if a runner had stopped on that particular play. 1st of all, one reason why I always sit as close as possible to directly behind the plate as I can is to get the best possible vantage point for the widest variety of plays, but a more important reason is, you don’t score a game like every play is the determining factor in the 7th game of the WS, and need to score by committee.

In the end, you can throw all the wrinkles and what ifs out that you want, but it really doesn’t matter because the scorer can only do his best because he’s the only one there, in the moment. There’s a lot worse things to criticize scorers for than whether or not they missed the minutia of the described play. If you don’t see something, you can’t score it.

Stats, Have you ever been accused of over analyzing a situation? I simply asked for a confirmation of my scoring of the situation. You started the "it could be scored different if this happened stuff"

I don't doubt your intelligence or ability as a scorekeeper. Please don't talk down to me.

quote:

Originally posted by OK Heat:
Stats, Have you ever been accused of over analyzing a situation? I simply asked for a confirmation of my scoring of the situation. You started the "it could be scored different if this happened stuff"

I don't doubt your intelligence or ability as a scorekeeper. Please don't talk down to me.

All I was doing was the same thing you were doing, throwing “wrinkles into the conversation. If you took that as me talking down to you, you were mistaken.

Going WAYYYYY back to the original situation.....Sounds like an error during the play at 1st. If ANY runs scored after that play, then they would all be unearned based upon what each batter did AFTER the bunt. UNLESS in the judgement of the scorer, the batter would have been safe at first no matter how the throw went. Isn't that correct? I might have missed something somewhere but I didn't see anyone address the original play. If someone did, I appologize.

quote:

Originally posted by jfsbndr:
Going WAYYYYY back to the original situation.....Sounds like an error during the play at 1st. If ANY runs scored after that play, then they would all be unearned based upon what each batter did AFTER the bunt. UNLESS in the judgement of the scorer, the batter would have been safe at first no matter how the throw went. Isn't that correct? I might have missed something somewhere but I didn't see anyone address the original play. If someone did, I appologize.

Jfsbndr, Thanks for joining the discussion. If you look way back at the first post, The first two batters of the inning reached and the the error occurred on the third batter. There were no outs. If there had been two outs when the error occurred what you posted would be correct regarding all the runs that followed the error.

The situation that occurred in this game means a scorekeeper has to go back and recreate the inning without the errors and see if the runs would have scored without any errors. Let say the next batter after the error hits a home run, all the runs become earned now, or even three straight ground outs that would have driven in runs after they were advanced by the sacrifice. There are numerous situations that causes the runs to be earned even with the error. The fly ball to right that happened in the game, if it had been deeper it would have been a sac fly. At this point you would go ahead and determine that the first run that scored on the error is now earned since it would have scored on the sac fly without the error. Then you just have to see what happens after that to see if the second run is earned or not. If pitcher gets two K's to end inning after sac fly, the second run of that inning is unearned.

Anyway, thanks for asking. It gets involved recreating innings sometimes. and Stats is correct when he says the benefit of the doubt always is given to the pitcher when determining whether a run scores or not when doing so.

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
If things were EXACTLY as you described them, the run would be UE. Everything would ride on the ball to right. Some scorers get right down to it and take into account the “wheels” of the runner who scored, and if he would have scored if he was still on 3rd.

Stats, This thread would have just faded off in the sunset if you had ended your first post with your first sentence. The wheels stuff had nothing to do with my situation, the ball to right was shallow and the runner was not trying score on the tag up, his intent was to draw the throw.

And then there's this quote from you.

That’s your definition of what a scorer s supposed to do, but it may not be mine or JMoff’s, and that’s where there’s a lot of leeway in what happens. There’s absolutely nothing I can think of that precludes a scorer from considering who the runners are. I wouldn’t do it, but then again, there are a few other scorers runnin’ around beside me.

This is an example of talking down to me. It was also improper for you to speak for JMoff.

I will openly admit here in front of you, God and everyone else on here that I am certain you are a superior scorekeeper in comparison to me. I do a good job and I want to do it right. I make mistakes and I am man enough to admit it when I do.

I guess I really didn't need to ask, I was confident in how I scored this. Later.

OK HEAT - I get what you are saying, I was just considering what was written and that was that since the ball hit to RF was not a SAC Fly, that was out #1. Follow that with a K that is two down. A walk loaded the bases but that was followed by another K to end the inning.

I guess what I don't understand is all the discussion about possibilities versus what actually occured. Because no one scored on the fly ball to right, I'm not sure why there is discussion on a Sac Fly since it never occured.

Just wondering and trying to get back to the actual plays in the inning.

Thanks

quote:

Originally posted by jfsbndr:
OK HEAT - I get what you are saying, I was just considering what was written and that was that since the ball hit to RF was not a SAC Fly, that was out #1. Follow that with a K that is two down. A walk loaded the bases but that was followed by another K to end the inning.

I guess what I don't understand is all the discussion about possibilities versus what actually occured. Because no one scored on the fly ball to right, I'm not sure why there is discussion on a Sac Fly since it never occured.

Just wondering and trying to get back to the actual plays in the inning.

Thanks

Yes, thank you for your common sense reply. Sometimes scorekeepers like to play the "what if this happened instead game?" That's all that was going on here between Stats and I. There was no sac fly in the game, but if there had been it would have changed the status of the unearned run.

quote:

Originally posted by OK Heat:
Stats, This thread would have just faded off in the sunset if you had ended your first post with your first sentence. The wheels stuff had nothing to do with my situation, the ball to right was shallow and the runner was not trying score on the tag up, his intent was to draw the throw.

Well, if the thought in posting to a forum like this was to only discuss the obvious and not to consider anything else, I prolly wouldn’t waste my time. Whether the “wheels stuff” did or didn’t have anything to do with “your situation”, it may well have been considered by someone in a similar situation, and that’s why I mentioned it. Not to make you look foolish or inferior, but to include more people into the possible situation.

quote:

And then there's this quote from you.

That’s your definition of what a scorer s supposed to do, but it may not be mine or JMoff’s, and that’s where there’s a lot of leeway in what happens. There’s absolutely nothing I can think of that precludes a scorer from considering who the runners are. I wouldn’t do it, but then again, there are a few other scorers runnin’ around beside me.

This is an example of talking down to me. It was also improper for you to speak for JMoff.

If you took that as insulting, you must have the thinnest skin of anyone I’ve ever come in contact with. All I was doing was stating a fact and an opinion. The last thing I was thinking was whether or not I was scoring points on you.

As for speaking for JMoff, I thought I carefully constructed that sentence to preclude any possible thought that I was putting words in his mouth by using the phrase, “but it may not be”. To me that indicated only the possibility that he or I may not agree with your definition, not that we did or didn’t. If it offended you, I don’t what to say, other than there was honestly no intention of that at all.

quote:

I will openly admit here in front of you, God and everyone else on here that I am certain you are a superior scorekeeper in comparison to me. I do a good job and I want to do it right. I make mistakes and I am man enough to admit it when I do.

I have no idea where you got the idea that this was some kind of contest to prove who was the better sk, but I’ve never seen it that way. To be honest, I’ve been doing this so long, I no longer worry much about such things because I know I can only affect what I do, not what anyone else does. As for admitting to mistakes, would it make you feel better if I went into my archives and pulled out instances where I admitted in print that I made some kind of mistake or took the time to explain why something was scored the way it was? I’ve been doing a newsletter after ever single HS game I’ve scored for the last 10 years, so it would take a lot of time, but I’ll do it if it will get you to understand that I’m only different, not better or worse.

Here’s a quick example. Go to Page 36 here http://www.infosports.com/scor.../images/b4league.pdf

That’s the newsletter after the Mar 16th game this past season. There happened to be a few things that took place in that game that caused a lot of folks to scratch their heads because they didn’t understand what had taken place, nor what the rules said. I wasn’t talking down to the people who read it, but rather just trying to explain what had taken place.

Ok Stats, Let's just shake and let it go. The one thing about texting and formats like this is the loss of the nuances of conversation. People can get offended by things typed that might not offend them if spoken in person.

You must admit though that you can be a bit argumentative.

Very nice newsletter! Very well written and very informative. Your program is lucky to have someone so committed to service.