MLB changes Ortiz ruling from E to H in Darvish near no-hitter

IMHO - that play was an error all the way. I saw it live and scored it in my own book as an error.

MLB doesn't provide any information when they over turn a scoring decision. I would like to see something. If their answer was, "the ball didn't touch the fielder's glove, so no error" it would break my heart / make me think us scorekeepers have a position in MLB.

For the record, I'm a die hard Red Sox fan, but that ball was an error.

Not a lot for me to say. The OSK ruled it an error, and the powers to be changed it to a hit. That’s the way the process works.

My best guess is, if there wasn’t a no-hitter on the line, there wouldn’t have been any controversy or appeal. But then again, it may have been scored a hit in the 1^st place.

That's what I believe. You rarely see a play like that
 ruled an error.

I think MLB's over-ruling the decision without any clarifying explanation just serves to further confuse the issue.  Kind of puts the official scorers in a tough situation -- especially since there was indeed another occurrence similar to this one that happened after the Darvish situation -- and it was ruled an error.

MLB clarified the "transfer" situation a few weeks ago -- why not clarify this one?  I just hope they didn't use the "it never touched his glove" reasoning to reach their decision. As someone pointed out, if that criterion was used, Bill Buckner would never have been charged with an error.

All pretty interesting -- and makes for great discussion -- and further confirms that baseball has its own unique qualities.

The only reason it was original ruled a error because pitcher had no hitter going and they were the home team.  If you saw the play nobody made a play on it, You can't give an error because of lack of effort,  My two cents.

I still don't know how you reconcile scoring it a hit, given the rule that the official scorer quoted:

Weller cited Rule 10.12, which covers errors in the official scoring rules and includes the comment: "The official scorer shall charge an outfielder with an error if such outfielder allows a fly ball to drop to the ground if, in the official scorer's judgment, at that position making ordinary effort would have caught such fly ball."

If MLB is not going to go by the rule, then they should change it.

RPD,

What happened is exactly what should have happened on any judgment call. As long as something is left to the judgment of someone, there will be differing opinions about it.

I agree, Stats, and you make a good point.  It's all about judgement -- and there will never be 100 consensus.

But when the top dog in the organization makes a ruling that will likely affect all future rulings like this, wouldn't it be helpful to the baseball community if he would explain his rationale?

I also understand that there are lots of scorekeeping appeals that we never hear about -- and no explanation is ever given.  It just seems like this is one of real significance and that scorekeepers (and fans) deserve to know what factors are to be used in making that judgement call.  A little transparency would go a long ways here.

Originally Posted by RPD:

…But when the top dog in the organization makes a ruling that will likely affect all future rulings like this, wouldn't it be helpful to the baseball community if he would explain his rationale?

I also understand that there are lots of scorekeeping appeals that we never hear about -- and no explanation is ever given.  It just seems like this is one of real significance and that scorekeepers (and fans) deserve to know what factors are to be used in making that judgement call.  A little transparency would go a long ways here.

Yes, it would be nice if MLB generated a memo of explanation and made it public, but that’s not the way they operate. At most what they’ll do, is send every organization a memo that tells them how MLB wants them to interpret and apply the rule. The rest of the baseball world is pretty much left on its own to fend for itself.

A few years back I was given a copy of the rule change sent to ML organizations that added the definition of Ordinary Effort. It had the rule change, the way ML wanted it interpreted, and explanations. But here’s the deal. Any organization that generates it own rule book, which is every organization other than MLB, could ask MLB for the explanation, then put it in their rule book. Problem is, few will do it, and of those that will, it will take them years to update their rules.

I understand that normally when a ball in the air goes untouched, and lands it is scored a hit.  I always had a problem with that, and thought the actual scoring rule stated that was a hit.  While watching the game, they showed a section of the rule that stated otherwise, and said a ball in the air does not have to be touched by a glove, or player, and if deemed ordinary effort would have resulted in an out, then the scorer can rule it an error.  Why is the "unwritten" rule that all fly balls that land untouched are a hit?  That always bothered me, and I was not happy to see it overturned.  Equally disappointed, that that call was challenged in the first place.

I have always had a problem with the routine fly ball dropping between outfielders being called a hit at any level of play.

The rules are pretty clear, if the ball could be caught with ordinary effort, it's an error if it isn't caught. The ball Ortiz hit should've been caught with ordinary effort at the MLB level (or AAA, or AA, or A, or Legion, of HS or Jr. High for that matter). The scorekeeper used his judgement (which he validated with Elias before making the call).

The overturn is what is completely mistifying to me. The rule supports the scorekeeper. Somebody else in this thread said if the rule is wrong, change the rule. I totally agree.

Today, the rule set is clear. That ball is an error. To overturn it requires SOME kind of a story (second baseman out of position, so not ordinary effort) or something. Otherwise, MLB is not following their own rules, leaving us scorekeepers to the mercy of complaining parents.

Originally Posted by JMoff:

…Today, the rule set is clear. That ball is an error. To overturn it requires SOME kind of a story (second baseman out of position, so not ordinary effort) or something. Otherwise, MLB is not following their own rules, leaving us scorekeepers to the mercy of complaining parents.

I understand how so many people are confused, but for me, the thing that make it so difficult on this particular kind of play is something in that same comment that often gets ignored.

The official scorer shall not score mental mistakes or misjudgments as errors unless a specific rule prescribes otherwise.

I don’t know about y’all, but I don’t think so much of myself that I’m gonna assume there was no mental mistake or misjudgment on a play like that, to where I’ll charge an error on it. Before I ding a fielder for a misplay, I like to be fairly confident its deserved.

Stats:   "... unless a specific rule provides otherwise."  

That's the thing.  A specific rule DID prescribe otherwise.  It's the part of 10.12 that was quoted in a previous post.  If MLB doesn't want to abide by that rule (or comment), should they not then remove it from OBR?

In the bigger picture, we both know that OBR isn't (and won't ever be) perfect.  But if they can clear up a few of the circular references, to me that would be progress.

RPD,

Exactly what rule specified to the exclusion of all else that an error MUST be scored on a play like that? To me, as long as nothing says “must” or “shall”, its still a judgment call and open to individual interpretation.

Here’s an example. In our game last night, we had a runner on 2^nd. Because our team runs like rabbits on crack, I’ve learned to watch the runners very closely. I watched the runner take off for 3^rd before the pitcher released the ball, and the ball hit the dirt. The catcher made a stupendous pick and got the runner by a hair, but when one of the reporters in the press box asked what had happened because he wasn’t watching, the OSK said the runner was caught stealing, but if he hadn’t been put out it would have been a wild pitch.

I called BS on him but there’s no doubt there’s a lot of others out there who believe the same way he does, that if a pitch is in the dirt and a runner moves up, its automatically a wild pitch. That’s only true if the pitch in the dirt is the reason the runner moved up.

The real crux of the matter is the interpretation of "misjudgment". If "misjudgment" means miss judging a fly ball than this play was a hit. If "misjudgment" means throwing to third when a runner is standing there instead of getting the batter at first with two outs, then I understand the inerpretation. In my world, "misjudgment" means we can't drop fly balls at MLB level and not get charged with an "E".

I will continue to live in my world until somebody publishes guidelines that are different than the current OBR's.

Stats, to your other post: I watch a lot of college games from half way between the plate and first base down low. Those seats are provided free, but they aren't real good for scoring. In the case you describe, the left eye is watching the pitch while the right eye is trying to watch the runner. It isn't my optimal setup, but I'm not official so it doesn't matter. As you say, the scorekeeper needs to know if the runner is running on the pitch or reading the catcher's body leaning forward for the pitch in the dirt.

It is amazing some of the scoring mistakes made at D-I. My son was screwed out of two saves in one series because the scorekeeper didn't know the rules for a save. I sent them an email and they admitted they screwed up and made the changes.

Stats:  You stated, "To me, as long as nothing says 'must' or 'shall', it's still a judgement call and open to interpretation."

That rule DOES say "shall".   "The official scorer shall charge an outfielder with an error if such outfielder allows a fly ball to drop to the ground if, in the official scorer’s judgment, an outfielder at that position making ordinary effort would have caught such fly ball.

Is Joe Torre truly saying that in HIS judgement that fly ball would NOT have been caught by a major league outfielder making ordinary effort?  Guess we'll never know -- and in my view, that's a sad commentary.

Originally Posted by JMoff:

The real crux of the matter is the interpretation of "misjudgment". If "misjudgment" means miss judging a fly ball than this play was a hit. If "misjudgment" means throwing to third when a runner is standing there instead of getting the batter at first with two outs, then I understand the inerpretation. In my world, "misjudgment" means we can't drop fly balls at MLB level and not get charged with an "E".

I will continue to live in my world until somebody publishes guidelines that are different than the current OBR's.

Well, the real crux of the matter is that I never score ML games other than for fun and then only by watching them on TV. I pretty much exclusively score HS games now, and the standard is one heck of a lot different. If I were to score an error on every play where a player made some kind of “misjudgment”, I’m pretty sure I’d be scoring at least twice the number of errors I do now.

I honestly don’t know how I’d score a ML game if it was actually my job to do it. But I do know this. There’s a heck of a lot more direction coming down from MLB to the teams and through them to the scorers than us “civilians” ever see.

RPD,

If you couldn’t tell from my example what I meant, I gave a poor example. I’m not going to argue about it because I’ll never be in the position to have to actually score a ML game. I should have said “must or shall without condition” or something else. I’m sorry I can’t get my point across so every person in the world understands me.

Most likely nobody reading this forum will ever score a MLB game for record (including me). The issue I have is this play was apparently singled out in training for those that do score MLB games as an example where they need to score errors, then one of their own scores an error and they over turn his call.

I'm thinking this is BS. The scorer should score the games and the administrators need to push paper. Just MHO. 

In my noobness i call it an error easy.

Originally Posted by JMoff:

…I'm thinking this is BS. The scorer should score the games and the administrators need to push paper. Just MHO. 

That’s precisely why when I agree to score for a team, the book and the ability to change the stats never leaves my control. I’ll discuss anything, and change anything where I’ve misapplied a rule or didn’t have a good view of the play, but other than that, my judgments are the same as an umpire’s. If that’s not acceptable, then someone else can do the SK’ing and run the numbers.

Agree, I'm going to make my own calls. I scored at least 30 D-I college games this season and I only disagreed with the guy who counted twice. Once I scored an E against our SS, the other time I scored an E against an opposing center fielder on a play that made the Ortiz thing look tame.

I think these kinds of issues are few and far between (no my kid wasn't pitching when I scored the E against our SS).

Originally Posted by JMoff:

Agree, I'm going to make my own calls….

It’s a darn shame that there are so many coaches/managers out there who just won’t delegate the authority for the job to someone, then leave it be. If they aren’t happy with how the job’s being done, they should do what any other boss with the powder to blow himself to the Devil does. Train them!

When the coach/manager sticks his fingers into something he isn’t giving 100% attention to, all he’s doing is causing problems.