Stupid baseball rule

Lee called me last night asking if I was watching the Twins get no hit. I changed the channel to see that they had one run, but no hits. Got me to thinking about the stupid rule change they made some years back that said a pitcher would not be credited with a no-hitter if he lost game.

For the most part, if a pitcher throwing a no hitter loses a game, it means that the defense behind him really sucked that day. It also means that the hitters weren't helping out the cause either. The pitcher has no control over any of that, so why should he be penalized for something had no control over? He still threw a no-hitter regardless of the outcome of the game. I can understand not offically counting no-hitters that were less than 9 innings.

I know Andy Hawkings was affected by this, but I there were one or two other no-hitters erased from the record book because of this new rule.

Jay

I don't believe the rule is as you say. From MLB's site:

An official no-hit game occurs when a pitcher (or pitchers) allows no hits during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings. In a no-hit game, a batter may reach base via a walk, an error, a hit by pitch, a passed ball or wild pitch on strike three, or catcher's interference.

I believe the rule was changed to require nine innings and a complete game. That cost Dean Chance a perfect game, retroactively, because of a rain-shortened game, and Hawkins because he only went eight innings (he was the visiting pitcher).

By that definition, Hawkins pitched a complete game as the game went 9 innings.

Jay

actually, that game went 8 1/2 innings.

yes, technically, the game went 8.5 inninings, but officially it went 9 innings. Either way, it's still a stupid rule.

Jay