Not too different than Greg Maddux throwing a 1 hitter one, maybe two times for the Cubs and losing. The 1 hit being a solo home run and the Cubs being epic levels of inept in those days.
MLB 2022 Season: Houston Warship: Go Phuck Yourselves
- Thread starter Timby
- Start date
- Status
Which doesn't make a lick of sense, since five innings is the cut-off for an official game and a pitcher is credited with a complete game (if he pitched its entirety) if a game runs short.
https://www.mlb.com/glossary/standard-stats/complete-game
But the no-hitter rule clearly states the pitcher or pitchers (for a combined no-no) must go 9 innings. It was the same reason those 7 inning double header no-hitters didn't "count".
It doesn't have to make sense, because if it did, it'd be about the only baseball rule that did.
I didn't make the rules, but thems' the facts Jack. 
There used to be 50 more no-hitters on the record books, but in September 1991 the Committee for Statistical Accuracy, chaired by then MLB Commissioner Fay Vincent, changed the official definition of a no hitter, declaring it a game of nine innings or more that ends with no hits. That leaves 316 sanctioned no-hitters (294 in the A.L. and N.L.), detailed here.
The stringent definition eliminated 36 no-hitters from the books that were shortened by rain, darkness or other reasons (and one after the decision), as well as two losing efforts by the away team in which the home team doesn’t bat in the bottom of the ninth. (Three such no-nos have been thrown since 1991 that would have qualified under the old rules.) This list is also providing a home for the 7-inning doubleheader no-hitters that became a thing in the pandemic-laden years of 2020 and 2021.
It also wiped out 12 no-hitters by pitchers who threw nine innings of no-hit ball only to yield a hit in extra innings. That narrow definition kept Pedro Martínez out of the exclusive no-no club, even though his ball is featured in the National Baseball Hall of Fame’s “No-Nos and Perfectos” exhibit. Martínez threw nine innings of perfect ball against the Padres on June 3, 1995, but his Expos couldn’t score a run and Martínez wound up giving up a hit in the 10th. The rule also keeps Rich Hill’s 2017 nine-inning no-no (killed on a walk-off homer in the 10th) and the Tampa Bay Rays’ 2022 combined no-no through nine from ever reaching the record books.
https://www.nonohitters.com/near-no-hitters/
There used to be 50 more no-hitters on the record books, but in September 1991 the Committee for Statistical Accuracy, chaired by then MLB Commissioner Fay Vincent, changed the official definition of a no hitter, declaring it a game of nine innings or more that ends with no hits. That leaves 316 sanctioned no-hitters (294 in the A.L. and N.L.), detailed here.
The stringent definition eliminated 36 no-hitters from the books that were shortened by rain, darkness or other reasons (and one after the decision), as well as two losing efforts by the away team in which the home team doesn’t bat in the bottom of the ninth. (Three such no-nos have been thrown since 1991 that would have qualified under the old rules.) This list is also providing a home for the 7-inning doubleheader no-hitters that became a thing in the pandemic-laden years of 2020 and 2021.
It also wiped out 12 no-hitters by pitchers who threw nine innings of no-hit ball only to yield a hit in extra innings. That narrow definition kept Pedro Martínez out of the exclusive no-no club, even though his ball is featured in the National Baseball Hall of Fame’s “No-Nos and Perfectos” exhibit. Martínez threw nine innings of perfect ball against the Padres on June 3, 1995, but his Expos couldn’t score a run and Martínez wound up giving up a hit in the 10th. The rule also keeps Rich Hill’s 2017 nine-inning no-no (killed on a walk-off homer in the 10th) and the Tampa Bay Rays’ 2022 combined no-no through nine from ever reaching the record books.
https://www.nonohitters.com/near-no-hitters/
I didn't make the rules, but thems' the facts Jack.
There used to be 50 more no-hitters on the record books, but in September 1991 the Committee for Statistical Accuracy, chaired by then MLB Commissioner Fay Vincent, changed the official definition of a no hitter, declaring it a game of nine innings or more that ends with no hits. That leaves 316 sanctioned no-hitters (294 in the A.L. and N.L.), detailed here.
The stringent definition eliminated 36 no-hitters from the books that were shortened by rain, darkness or other reasons (and one after the decision), as well as two losing efforts by the away team in which the home team doesn’t bat in the bottom of the ninth. (Three such no-nos have been thrown since 1991 that would have qualified under the old rules.) This list is also providing a home for the 7-inning doubleheader no-hitters that became a thing in the pandemic-laden years of 2020 and 2021.
It also wiped out 12 no-hitters by pitchers who threw nine innings of no-hit ball only to yield a hit in extra innings. That narrow definition kept Pedro Martínez out of the exclusive no-no club, even though his ball is featured in the National Baseball Hall of Fame’s “No-Nos and Perfectos” exhibit. Martínez threw nine innings of perfect ball against the Padres on June 3, 1995, but his Expos couldn’t score a run and Martínez wound up giving up a hit in the 10th. The rule also keeps Rich Hill’s 2017 nine-inning no-no (killed on a walk-off homer in the 10th) and the Tampa Bay Rays’ 2022 combined no-no through nine from ever reaching the record books.
https://www.nonohitters.com/near-no-hitters/
I guess that was Vincent putting his mark on the game the way Manfraud is doing?
I mean, historically, I'd argue that Vincent's mark on the game would be banning George Steinbrenner, expansion (the Rockies and Marlins deals were made under his watch), being the only commissioner to have an actual decent relationship with the MLBPA and being the only commissioner to get shanked in the back because the owners thought he was too conciliatory towards labor.
But the no-hitter change seems rooted in nostalgia and basically like a statistical version of No True Scotsman. "Back in my day..."
Christopher Morel in his first major league at-bat…it’s a dinger…and I was there to see it. 
Christopher Morel in his first major league at-bat…it’s a dinger…and I was there to see it.
So worked up he missed first base.
Say, what's a Spankees fan doing in Wrigley anyway?
Because I love Wrigley, and I love Chicago.
I actually came to the city to see the Yankees/Whitesox series. Those games were great, I fully admit that (I even managed to score some German beer ar U.S. New Guaranteed Field Cellular Park Rate of Comiskey). But Wrigley is so much more fun - even though neither of my teams are playing there right now.
Last edited:
I misread that as Christopher Meloni and for a second, I was very confused.Christopher Morel in his first major league at-bat…it’s a dinger…and I was there to see it.
That said, that's a very cool feeling. I'm so happy for him.
I misread that as Christopher Meloni and for a second, I was very confused.
Law & Order: Unwritten Rules Enforcement
Christopher Morel in his first major league at-bat…it’s a dinger…and I was there to see it.
Between Morel's badass bat flip and then moonwalking to first base after nearly socking that ball onto Waveland, plus the incident between Vogelbach and Contreras at the plate, I'm fully expecting beanballs to be flying soon.
Last edited:
Maybe he can get the cookie monster to pitch too. They could use some help there (as always).
So lemme get this straight…Tony La Russa thinks Josh Donaldson was being racist in that thing with Tim Anderson? Fucking really? 
Not only did Anderson start that shit in the first place (by comparing himself to Jackie Robinson) but La Russa…come on…
Not only did Anderson start that shit in the first place (by comparing himself to Jackie Robinson) but La Russa…come on…
I know I'll regret this but what thing?
A few years ago Anderson was being interviewed and basically called himself today’s Jackie Robinson. So that’s why Donaldson called him “Jackie” in the game the other day (causing the benches to clear). There wasn’t any intent. It was a reference to that earlier interview.
If Anderson hadn’t called himself Jackie in the first place, none of this would have happened.
There clearly was intent to rile Anderson up and start some shit, or else he wouldn’t have said anything.
Yup. I regret it.
Dumb on all sides.
Dumb on all sides.
- Status
