ER with pitching change, wild pitch

I think the reliever gets charged the ER.

How can it be the reliever's ER?  because he didn't put the runner on base.  If he threw 2 wild pitches with no runner on, there would have been no damage.

I’m sure there is a rule out there that covers this.  I’d guess that the runner is the responsibility of the first pitcher.  If he threw the wild pitch, it would be an ER.  And if the reliever gives up a HR instead of a wild pitch, the ER still belongs to the first pitcher.  I was just thinking this was a very odd situation and might have a different ruling.  

You are charged according to your responsibility though.  So if the reliever walks one and then gives up a HR, the starter is charged with 2 ER and the reliever with 1.  The wild pitch is the reliever's error I think.

The pitcher who allowed the base runner is charged with the run. It’s why ERA isn’t always the best way to judge a reliever. A reliever could allow runs to score every appearance and still have a 0.00 ERA.

Just for fun, I asked two different chatbots and got two completely different answers. . . so I don't think these things are taking over the world any time soon.  What do you think?

ChatGPT

In Major League Baseball, the determination of whether a run is earned or unearned is based on the circumstances surrounding the run-scoring event. The key factors are typically errors, passed balls, and wild pitches. Here's how the scenario you described would be evaluated:

1. The starting pitcher gave up a double.
2. The reliever threw two wild pitches, allowing the runner to advance to third and eventually score.

In this case, the run would likely be considered an unearned run for the starting pitcher. The reason is that a wild pitch is not attributed to the pitcher who gave up the double; instead, it is a separate action by the reliever. Since the run scored as a result of the wild pitches and not the initial double, the starting pitcher would not be charged with an earned run in this scenario.

It's important to note that earned run calculations can sometimes be subjective, and official scorers have some discretion in making these determinations based on the specific details of the play.

----

Google's Bard:

As the official scorer in this scenario, I would charge the run as an earned run to the Starting Pitcher. Here's my reasoning:

1. Scoring opportunity with two outs: While two outs typically reduce the scoring threat, MLB rules define an earned run as one that scores "before fielding chances have been offered to put out the offensive team." A runner on second base with two outs still presents a clear scoring opportunity, especially in late innings or with a good hitter at the plate.
2. Double creates the initial threat: The Starting Pitcher allowed the double that directly put the runner in scoring position. The wild pitches by the Reliever simply advanced the runner, but they wouldn't have been relevant without the initial base hit.
3. Inherited runner rule doesn't apply: The inherited runner rule applies when a reliever assumes pitching duties with runners on base and at least one out. In this case, the double occurred with two outs before the pitching change. Therefore, the rule doesn't affect the earned run assignment.
4. Benefit of the doubt to the pitcher: Although subjective, official scorers generally apply the "benefit of the doubt" principle to pitchers when determining earned runs. In this instance, it's likely the runner on second would have scored even without the wild pitches, based on the hitter's abilities or the situation in the game.

Therefore, considering all these factors and applying the official MLB scoring rules, the double by the Starting Pitcher directly created the scoring opportunity that led to the run, regardless of the subsequent wild pitches by the Reliever. Thus, the run would be charged as an earned run to the Starting Pitcher.

It's important to remember that scoring judgments can sometimes involve gray areas and require considering the specific context of the situation. However, based on the rules and standard practices, this scenario leans towards an earned run for the Starting Pitcher.

I hope this explanation clarifies the decision-making process and provides insight into how an official scorer would approach this situation.

@RHP_Parent posted:

Just for fun, I asked two different chatbots and got two completely different answers. . . so I don't think these things are taking over the world any time soon.  What do you think?

ChatGPT

In Major League Baseball, the determination of whether a run is earned or unearned is based on the circumstances surrounding the run-scoring event. The key factors are typically errors, passed balls, and wild pitches. Here's how the scenario you described would be evaluated:

1. The starting pitcher gave up a double.
2. The reliever threw two wild pitches, allowing the runner to advance to third and eventually score.

In this case, the run would likely be considered an unearned run for the starting pitcher. The reason is that a wild pitch is not attributed to the pitcher who gave up the double; instead, it is a separate action by the reliever. Since the run scored as a result of the wild pitches and not the initial double, the starting pitcher would not be charged with an earned run in this scenario.

It's important to note that earned run calculations can sometimes be subjective, and official scorers have some discretion in making these determinations based on the specific details of the play.

----

Google's Bard:

As the official scorer in this scenario, I would charge the run as an earned run to the Starting Pitcher. Here's my reasoning:

1. Scoring opportunity with two outs: While two outs typically reduce the scoring threat, MLB rules define an earned run as one that scores "before fielding chances have been offered to put out the offensive team." A runner on second base with two outs still presents a clear scoring opportunity, especially in late innings or with a good hitter at the plate.
2. Double creates the initial threat: The Starting Pitcher allowed the double that directly put the runner in scoring position. The wild pitches by the Reliever simply advanced the runner, but they wouldn't have been relevant without the initial base hit.
3. Inherited runner rule doesn't apply: The inherited runner rule applies when a reliever assumes pitching duties with runners on base and at least one out. In this case, the double occurred with two outs before the pitching change. Therefore, the rule doesn't affect the earned run assignment.
4. Benefit of the doubt to the pitcher: Although subjective, official scorers generally apply the "benefit of the doubt" principle to pitchers when determining earned runs. In this instance, it's likely the runner on second would have scored even without the wild pitches, based on the hitter's abilities or the situation in the game.

Therefore, considering all these factors and applying the official MLB scoring rules, the double by the Starting Pitcher directly created the scoring opportunity that led to the run, regardless of the subsequent wild pitches by the Reliever. Thus, the run would be charged as an earned run to the Starting Pitcher.

It's important to remember that scoring judgments can sometimes involve gray areas and require considering the specific context of the situation. However, based on the rules and standard practices, this scenario leans towards an earned run for the Starting Pitcher.

I hope this explanation clarifies the decision-making process and provides insight into how an official scorer would approach this situation.

You could go this way or that way.

https://youtu.be/yejtZgzB5Ik?si=j9_hO56PgcdISl1W