Skip to main content

100 replies

No Hitter Etiquette?

bsbl247bsbl2471,000+ posts
I watched a great pitching matchup and entertaining game today. Jered Weaver of the Angels and the Tigers Justin Verlander went head to head. It was the first time in 39 years that two pitchers with at least 14 wins faced each other before the month of August. It was a classic game with tremendous emotion, so I'm surprised nobody has made any comments? Verlander, arguably the best pitcher in baseball (IMO, the best stuff!) had a no hitter thru 7 innings. If you didn't see the highlights on ESPN or the MLB Network, here's what happened:

Magglio Ordonez hit a 2-run dinger off Weaver in the 3rd inning. Ordonez paused in the box before taking his turn around the bases. In his defense, it was a no doubter distance wise, but hugged the foul ball pole. IMO, he stayed back and watched to make sure it was a fair ball. Weaver didn't take it that way, and was visibly upset.

Fastforward to the home half of the 7th, and Carlos Guillen hit a bomb to right field. Guillen not only pulled a Reggie Jackson by flipping his bat and admiring for a few seconds, but he did a little shuffle, pumped his chest, and stared down Weaver on the way to first. Needless to say, the plate umpire warned both benches. The very next pitch, Weaver threw a fastball at Avila's earhole and was immediately tossed from the game. I didn't have a problem with Weaver making a statement, I just didn't like where the pitch was headed, no pun intended!

Now for the controversial play and my etiquette question. Verlander went into the 8th with a No No. The lead off hitter for the Angels, Erick Ayabar, attempted to reach base by laying down a bunt. Ayabar got on and the Detroit score keeper ruled an error on Verlander. Ayabar would later score on another error, thus breaking up Verlander's shutout. Izturis would drive in another run with a clean oppo single to officially break up the no hitter. Verlander won the game 3-2 for his 15th victory.

For the baseball tradionalists on the HSBBWeb...do you think the attempt to break up the No Hitter via a bunt was Bush League, as Verlander stated? Or, do you think it's part of the game and Ayabar was doing what ever possible to give his team a chance to win? Personally, as a former pitcher and current father of one, I would say it's Bush...HOWEVER, the antics of Guillen the previous inning allowed the Angels to ignore that "unwritten rule", and the bunt was appropriate in that situation. Any thoughts?
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

coach2709coach270910,000+ posts
I think Weaver overreacted to Ordonez because he was checking fair / foul on the homer. It was a no doubter and once it was fair he took off and kept his head down with no other gestures. I don't see the point of having an in doubt fair / foul ball going foul and the guy being halfway to second. There's showing up a pitcher and there's just natural human reaction. If Ordonez had hit it to left center and it was a no doubter this is a non-issue because he wouldn't have stood there.

I think Guillen was bush league because there was no need in what he did. Weaver made himself look bad by barking at Ordonez after the flyout and saying stuff to the Tigers dugout. I understand the testosterone aspect and honestly if I was in the Tiger dugout I would have had a hard time keeping my mouth shut but the standing / staring at Weaver was uncalled for.

As for Weaver throwing at Avila that was terrible. He did throw it at his head and luckily it looked like Avila was ready and able to get out of the way. Absolutely uncalled for and Weaver should apologize to his teammates since he doesn't get into the batter's box. If he had throw at his backside or legs then I can't really say much about that because Guillen brought that on by standing / staring. I think the ump did a great job in trying to control the situation. All he can do is warn them and now it's in the hands of the players to stay in the game.

In this situation I have no problem with the drag bunt. It was a 3 - 0 game and after the inning it was a 3 - 2 game. The drag bunt went beyond trying to break up a no no - it started a rally that got them back to a one swing being tied game. I would never criticize anybody for that. If the game was 7 - 0 then I think it comes under more of a microscope but I still don't think you can call it bush league. Where is the logic that the team being no hit rolls over and stops competing? I think if you break up a no no with a drag bunt you do sort of taint the break up but I can't go as far as calling it bush league.

When I hear pitchers / players / coaches say a drag bunt to break up a no no is bush league I picture a little kid throwing a temper tantrum because they didn't get their way. Verlander had a good chance to get Aybar out with a good throw. It would have been bang bang but he still had control of the no no in his hands. He makes the play then we probably don't have this conversation.
bsbl247bsbl2471,000+ posts
You're right Bulldog, as Charlie Sheen likes to say, "Winning!!!", is what it's all about. Having watched Mike Scioscia play and coach for several years, there's no way he has Ayabar lead off with a bunt to break up the no hitter. Scioscia is a baseball purist, but he and the Angels went into the 8th with an eye for eye attitude after the Guillen incident.

20dad, that's a pretty cool memory!

coach, I agree with the majority of your statement. You and I are on the same page, but if it wasn't for the circumstances in the prior inning with Guillen, I don't bunt to break it up...and as I stated above, I don't think Scioscia does either, JMO.
Last edited by bsbl247
coach2709coach270910,000+ posts
Not sure about the whole Aybar wouldn't have tried to bunt if Weaver hadn't thrown at Avila. It's possible but I can't see Scioscia telling Aybar to bunt as a form of retalitation. It could have went down like that but we'll never know.

I thought it was funny how Weaver headed straight to the Angels dugout after he threw at Avila. Mouthing the whole way and never made any attempt to go to the Tigers dugout until AFTER he got to Scioscia so he could hold him back. That cracked me up.
bsbl247bsbl2471,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by coach2709:

I thought it was funny how Weaver headed straight to the Angels dugout after he threw at Avila. Mouthing the whole way and never made any attempt to go to the Tigers dugout until AFTER he got to Scioscia so he could hold him back. That cracked me up.


I noticed the same thing and laughed, but I honestly don't think he was hiding behind his coach? Heck, when he left the field in the 3rd after Magglio's dinger, he walked by Cabrera and popped off. Weaver has some guts! I was fortunate to go on the field at Dodger Stadium earlier this year when the Tigers were in town (my buddies HS friend is one of the trainers for Detroit). Miguel Cabrera was nice enough to take a picture with my son. I'm a pretty big guy, 6'3" 260. I felt little standing next to Cabrera, he's a big man!
C cabbagedadHSBaseballWeb member since 2011
I didn't see the game but...

1. I don't think that bunting for a hit with a no no in tact had anything to do with the earlier antics.

2. The game was still close. You try to win any way you can. To win, you must score. To score you must get on base (or hit dingers). You get on base any way you can - take what the defense gives. In this case, I don't believe it goes against unwritten rules.

3. If the game was further out of reach, bunting for a hit would go against unwritten rules. Unless it was a blowout, I personally don't like this particular unwritten rule. A good bunt is just as valuable as any other form of base hit. Even if you're down five or six runs, if this is how you can best help your team offensively, I don't think it should be frowned upon just because the pitcher hasn't yet given up a hit. You have to start the offense somehow.
Now, if it is a blowout and the bunt is layed down for the primary purpose of breaking up the no no, that's a different story.
JMO... never liked that particular unwritten. Big rallies can be started by a bunt or two and MLB doesn't do it enough. Always a pet peeve of mine - I know I'm the minority on this one.
Last edited by cabbagedad
biggerpapibiggerpapi5,000+ posts
I think the bunt was fine. It's a close game.

Mags was fine. Weaver got a little too hot.

Guillen was a punk.

Weaver should have drilled the next guy...didn't really like throwing at his head. Although, it did look like he was trying to miss and the batter surely knew it was coming.

And I thought it was unfortunate the umpire warned both teams before Weaver had a chance to hit a batter.
W whits23100+ posts
Not sure i would do anything to help another team get a no hitter. Part of the game is bunting and fielding bunts. It also started a rally and got the team back in contention. If a football team had a shutout i wouldnt take a kneel down to help them i would air the ball out. I dont want to get no hit against at any point or time.
08Dad08Dad1,000+ posts
I guess I am more of a traditionalist - I would have thought really hard before bunting.

It is right on the border line for me - two more runs down so it is 5-0 I definitely don't bunt. If it is the 9th, I definitely don't bunt.

This one is right on the line - but I don't think I would do so.

Having said that, I do think that the bunting was deliberate - and called by the manager.

As for the throwing at the hitter - I don't think it was so bad - looked to me like it was over his head and missed by plenty after he ducked. Of course, everyone in the park knew it was coming so he should have had no problem dodging.
P Prime91,000+ posts
Any truly competitive pitcher, with a real fire in his belly, is gonna be "****ed" at a hitter trying to bunt for a hit in any situation. But, especially so in a possible "no-no" situation. His thoughts toward a hitter is; "man-up" and try to hit me big guy! If they are to give up a hit that want it to be a legitimate one. Bunting isn't hitting.

Nolan Ryan would glare at guys that tried to bunt and often suffered his retribution. I can remember guys being terrified to bunt off of Gibson or Drysdale.

Now from the other side of the ball, I want my guys to do anything to disrupt his rhythm and get something going. I would not, however, have a guy bunt late in the game to spoil a no-no. I would do it in the middle innings when I've seen that the guy is hot tonight and we are going to have to do something to get an opportunity to score.

So you have to do what you need to do to win but you aren't likely to win a game like this with a bunt single in the later or final inning. I do view it as kind of "bush" to just try to spoil it with a cheap bunt. JMO
TPMTPMHSBaseballweb Member since 2003
I think that the bunt was in retaliation to the attitude of Ordonaz and Guillen, you hit the ball and you take off, even in a legit HR no flippin bats, you haven't earned the respect like others have to sit and watch where it drops (though I think that it is never necessary even for guys like Albert or Ortiz). I don't blame Weaver but that business could have been taken care of at another time. JMO.

How many times have you seen a bunt play break up a potential no no?

This is the game within the game that goes on typically everyday in baseball (Cubs v Cardinals Matt Holliday spiked Starlin Castro), but we aren't always aware of it.

Verlander, the best pitcher in baseball right now, in no way deserved to have any of those guys act bush in this game, his teammates as well as Weaver. Not for any pitcher for that matter. He didn't diss his teammates which would be improper but I think he let it be known he wasn't happy.

The no no is a feat that is respected by all players and is good for baseball on that level and they know it.

I just think there were too many games in the game going on last night.
Last edited by TPM
AntzDadAntzDad1,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Prime9:
Any truly competitive pitcher, with a real fire in his belly, is gonna be "****ed" at a hitter trying to bunt for a hit in any situation. But, especially so in a possible "no-no" situation. His thoughts toward a hitter is; "man-up" and try to hit me big guy! If they are to give up a hit that want it to be a legitimate one. Bunting isn't hitting.


I agree with that pitcher. Swing away.
D dswann100+ posts
Here's a thought. How about fielding the bunt and making the play. That's what makes a no hitter and a perfect game so special.

Personally, I loved seeing these guys exhibiting a bit of emotion. The stoic nature of players in the game is a bit predictable.

As far as throwing at the guy. Everyone knew it was coming and Weaver should have been tossed only after a warning. I would have liked to have seen if Weaver would have taken another crack at the batter.

Lets see, if I want to get the opossing pitcher thrown out, all I have to do is induce the pitcher to thrown at the next batter ( anything on the inner 1/3) after a hr is spend 4-6 seconds watching it's flight. Count me in.
Last edited by dswann
zombywoofzombywoof1,000+ posts
quote:
So you have to do what you need to do to win but you aren't likely to win a game like this with a bunt single in the later or final inning. I do view it as kind of "bush" to just try to spoil it with a cheap bunt. JMO


How do you know a bunt single don't start a big rally? Until they use clocks in baseball, why should teams help the opponent beat them or not use a play that will catch the defense off-guard to try and set up to win a game? A bunt single is a hit period and the player did his job and got on base. No hit is a cheap hit. That's the purpose of playing. To try and win.
J HJ H5,000+ posts
dswann- There was a warning to both benches after Guillen's antics.

I have no problem with the bunt. The way you win baseball games is to score runs. You can't score runs without getting on base. If you want to bunt to reach base, then bunt to reach base. Verlander is a fielder just like the other 8 teammates he has on the field. It's his responsibility to field his position the same as everyone else.

If Weaver didn't throw at the next batter, I would have lost a lot of respect for him. Carlos Guillen mocked the game of baseball and deliberately disrespected Weaver on the field. His actions were immature and inappropriate. I hope young players don't see what he did as being "cool". I also hope young players understand the purpose of Weaver's pitch to Avila and the meaning behind retaliating to defend your team and your integrity.

Good for Verlander for a well-pitched game. Good for Weaver for defending himself and his team. Guillen has some maturing to do.
coach2709coach270910,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Out in LF:
Here's a thought:
Aybar lays down the bunt in an attempt to break up the no-no. Verlander fields the ball, sees that he is not going to throw out the speedy Aybar, so he throws wide so that it is recorded as an error to keep his no-no intact? Just a thought!

Now wouldn't that be bush league also?


Yes I would definitely say this is bush league and if I was a teammate of the pitcher I would be highly ticked off if he had done this. It's selfish to the highest degree and could lead to your team getting beat. A no hitter is special and it requires a lot of things to go just right. Bunting to break it up is not bush league because it's competing. Making an error to keep a no hitter intact is cheating the game.

JH I agree that Weaver needed to send a message but I totally disagree with the location of the pitch near his head. I basically blame Weaver for starting the whole thing by mouthing off to Ordonez and not realizing he wasn't trying to show him up. Guillen had a choice to how he should have acted and he chose wrong.
bsbl247bsbl2471,000+ posts
I'm apparently Old School? Interesting responses by everyone, and I respect all of your views. Weaver initially over-reacted to the Ordonez HR, most of us agree with that. However, Guillen took it to another level, and IMO ultimately cost Verlander the no hitter. Verlander was lights out, and in a pretty good rhythm. As a teammate, you don't mess with that! Guillen let his emotions take over after his dinger, and ultimately shut down the rhythm Verlander had up to that point of the game. How you ask? Afterwards, Weaver throws at Avila and is ejected. Scioscia brings someone in from the Pen, and he's alloted as many warm up pitches as possible. Verlander is forced to sit an additional ten minutes or so before taking the mound in the 8th. The first pitch, Aybar lays down a bunt that's ruled E-1. As I said earlier, Scioscia doesn't bunt in that situation, but the "unwritten rule" was thrown out after Guillen's antics...JMO.

In addition to the error by Verlander on the bunt, he also had an error at the plate during a simple pickle play...and should have been out of the inning. Unfortunately he had to face Izturis, a player that had a career batting average of over .400 against him, and ultimately lost the no no. Justin Verlander is a stud, and if he stays healthy he'll be flirting with a few more no-hitters!
wraggArmwraggArm500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Sandman:
quote:
Originally posted by dswann:
Here's a thought. How about fielding the bunt and making the play. That's what makes a no hitter and a perfect game so special.

Agreed. Should a pitcher not have to field his position in a no-hitter? That was a routine play for Verlander; he choked under pressure.


+1

The distinction is that a drag bunt is not a trick play - which really would be "bush" in a no-hitter. If bunting for a single were ever a sure thing, then the all fast guys would be forced to do it every at-bat.

Cool thing about "unwritten rules" is that everybody gets to interpret what they really say. But I don't think ANY rule should say that everybody in the ballpark has to get on the same side as the guy throwing the no-hitter...
Last edited by wraggArm
TPMTPMHSBaseballweb Member since 2003
quote:
Originally posted by AntzDad:
quote:
Originally posted by Prime9:
Any truly competitive pitcher, with a real fire in his belly, is gonna be "****ed" at a hitter trying to bunt for a hit in any situation. But, especially so in a possible "no-no" situation. His thoughts toward a hitter is; "man-up" and try to hit me big guy! If they are to give up a hit that want it to be a legitimate one. Bunting isn't hitting.


I agree with that pitcher. Swing away.


This has nothing to do with the pitcher not fielding his position, you know when the situation calls for a bunt and when it doesn't.
AntzDadAntzDad1,000+ posts
I don't know what a pitcher's fielding has to do with this.

I remember being 8 years old and our pitcher was throwing a no hitter in the all star game. In the last inning, the other coach told his batters to squat down so it was almost impossible to get a called strike. I thought it was bs then, just like bunting in a no hitter is now. Same for bunting against a pitcher with no legs.

But, to some, winning a baseball game is the most important thing in the world. For me, it's not. Smile
Last edited by AntzDad
biggerpapibiggerpapi5,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by AntzDad:
I don't know what a pitcher's fielding has to do with this...But, to some, winning a baseball game is the most important thing in the world. For me, it's not. Smile


Well, if Verlander would have made the throw on the bunt, he probably would have preserved the shutout. And if the Tigers could execute a simple rundown, they probably would have preserved the shutout.

And, in 8-year old baseball, winning isn't the most important thing. But in MLB where both of these teams probably have to win their division to get to the playoffs, then yes, winning is the most important thing.
wraggArmwraggArm500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by AntzDad:
I don't know what a pitcher's fielding has to do with this.

Yeah, maybe you're right. Maybe we should start having the pitcher wear a face-mask and helmet, and then have an infielder stand right beside him like they do in coach-pitch kiddie games. We should do everything we can to remove FTP from the game for pitchers, so the game doesn't really have to suffer the challenge of guys having to do something that's outside their "strict area of expertise".

Hey, I know...we could start holding all the games in batting cages. Then baseball can really be all about the battery...
zombywoofzombywoof1,000+ posts
If you're on the losing side of the scoreboard, the teams job is to do what it has to do to get baserunners and try to start a rally to try and win the game. In fact, what is bush is for teams to sit back and give up just because they're losing or not do what gives them the best opportunity to get a baserunner. If a defense is playing back and you need a baserunner and your best bunter and fastest player drops on down and gets on, then he did his job. There is no rule that says you can't bunt just because a pitcher is throwing a no-hitter.
Last edited by zombywoof
Coach_MayCoach_May10,000+ posts
There is no way to no for sure what the other teams intentions are. Are they laying down a drag bunt to get something started? Are they laying down a drag bunt to break up a no no? The assumption of the pitcher and his team in a situation like this is obvious. Of course the offensive team is going to say we are just trying to find a way to get something started. There have been times in the past when we have been getting it shoved on us and we went to the bunt game to shake it up. To get the defense to make some plays. To throw the pitcher out of his groove. I have never put on a bunt to break up a no no. I have put on a bunt and mulitple bunts, hit and runs, etc etc to attempt to shake things up. All in an attempt to win the game.

I think its bush to bunt to break up a no no. I think its pure baseball to put on a bunt because you believe its your best chance to shake things up and give your team a chance to compete, win. Yes there are unwritten rules in baseball. But unless you know the true intentions of the player you can't make a true call on something like this. You can speculate. But you really don't know.

I have always believed that a hitter should act like he has been there before when he hits a jack. Even if he never has. I have always believed a pitcher should never show up a hitter and a hitter should never show up a pitcher. At this level you get what you deserve when you do. And I don't have a problem with that.
P Prime91,000+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by Coach_May:
There is no way to no for sure what the other teams intentions are. Are they laying down a drag bunt to get something started? Are they laying down a drag bunt to break up a no no? The assumption of the pitcher and his team in a situation like this is obvious. Of course the offensive team is going to say we are just trying to find a way to get something started. There have been times in the past when we have been getting it shoved on us and we went to the bunt game to shake it up. To get the defense to make some plays. To throw the pitcher out of his groove. I have never put on a bunt to break up a no no. I have put on a bunt and mulitple bunts, hit and runs, etc etc to attempt to shake things up. All in an attempt to win the game.

I think its bush to bunt to break up a no no. I think its pure baseball to put on a bunt because you believe its your best chance to shake things up and give your team a chance to compete, win. Yes there are unwritten rules in baseball. But unless you know the true intentions of the player you can't make a true call on something like this. You can speculate. But you really don't know.

I have always believed that a hitter should act like he has been there before when he hits a jack. Even if he never has. I have always believed a pitcher should never show up a hitter and a hitter should never show up a pitcher. At this level you get what you deserve when you do. And I don't have a problem with that.


I agree. What puzzles me is; Weaver was obviously upset with Ordonez. Why throw at the next hitter? Either go after Ordonez at 1b, in the moment, or clock him the next time he comes to bat! But don't start chunking baseballs at somebody elses head because he showed you up... If I'm that next guy up that he tried to bean, they would need a forklift to pry me off Weaver!!
Last edited by Prime9
coach2709coach270910,000+ posts
You have to look at personnel and situation to determine if a guy dropped a bunt to break a no no or was competing. Erick Aybar is a skinny fast guy and the drag bunt is part of his skill set offensively. Why should he put that part of his offense on the shelf just because a guy has a no no going? That part is unrealistic in my opinion.

Now if Big Papi drops a bunt up third base because they have that shift on him going then yeah that's bush league. He doesn't have the drag bunt in his skill set so he shouldn't resort to that.

Look at the situation also to help determine intent. This game in question was 3 - 0 and after the inning was over it was 3 - 2. One swing of the bat ties it up so that means you do what it takes to generate offense. If the game was 7 - 0 then we got a different story. Once you get late in games you have to balance outs versus opportunities to bunt. I have no idea what the percentage is but the VAST majority of bunts (talking about both drag and sac) end up in outs. So if you're starting the 7th inning that means you have 9 outs before the game is over. If the score is 6 - 0 then you don't have enough outs to truly bunt as an offense. You can't afford to use one batter to move a guy 90 feet to score him. So with this logic you've taken away half the bunting attack. So now if a guy drops one down it's probably because it's in his skill set or he's caught you off guard. If the guy who doesn't have the drag bunt in his skill set drops one down then he's really being selfish because odds are he shouldn't get on.

Now when you throw in the fact you're in the 7th inning up 6 - 0 with a no no going you can still adjust your defense accordingly. Erick Aybar comes up then you play your corners up some because it's part of his skill set. The situation of the no no doesn't matter - you're playing baseball. A guy who comes up who doesn't drag bunt comes up then you can play back some because if he drops it down then I can see the arguement of it being bush league.
Next

Add Reply

Post
.

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
Link copied to your clipboard.
×