BZ 1986: Scoring Bug #3

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

This one is rather different from anything I've seen recently. Philadelphia and Louisville are tied 8-8 in the bottom of the ninth. Louisville loads the bases with two out, and the next hitter knocks one into the gap to win the game. No worries, right?

Except that the game doesn't know what to do at all. They gave the hitter credit for a walk-off double, but only had one run score, since the final was 9-8. There is simply no way a player can be credited with a double and have only one run score in this situation. (Yes, I know it's technically possible, but you know what I mean; there aren't going to be two guys standing around on third base.)

In reality, it looks like the game correctly had only one run score, and should have credited the batter with a single.

[bailey]

I think walk-off doubles are being scored nowadays. Longoria got credit for a 9th inning double that used to be scored as a single. Only a runner on 1st, however.
Longoria lifts Rays to walk-off win | MLB.com: News

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Originally Posted by bailey

I think walk-off doubles are being scored nowadays. Longoria got credit for a 9th inning double that used to be scored as a single. Only a runner on 1st, however.
Longoria lifts Rays to walk-off win | MLB.com: News

I would have no problem with the game crediting the hitter with a double here, but then more than one run needs to score with the bases loaded. You can have one run score and give the player a single, or two runs and give the player a double, but you can't do one run and a double.

[bailey]

So far, I can't find an example of a walk-off double with a runner on third. Only 1st and 2nd, so the winning run needs (apparently) to advance at least 2 bases to get credit for a double.

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Originally Posted by bailey

So far, I can't find an example of a walk-off double with a runner on third. Only 1st and 2nd, so the winning run needs (apparently) to advance at least 2 bases to get credit for a double.

And that makes sense, I think. If we're putting this into a rule that OOTP can incorporate, it should be, "Except for home runs, the hitter on the winning walk-off hit should be credited with advancing exactly as many bases as the winning run."

In fact, until the 1920s, this was true even on home runs. If memory serves, Babe Ruth had at least one walk-off home run in his career that wasn't counted as a home run because that's not how they scored it back then.

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Originally Posted by Eckstein 4 Prez

In fact, until the 1920s, this was true even on home runs. If memory serves, Babe Ruth had at least one walk-off home run in his career that wasn't counted as a home run because that's not how they scored it back then.

Here is the Retrosheet page that discusses this phenomenon. Babe Ruth's lost home run was on July 8, 1918, when he scored a runner from first with a home run and was credited with a triple.

[bailey]

Originally Posted by Eckstein 4 Prez

And that makes sense, I think. If we're putting this into a rule that OOTP can incorporate, it should be, "Except for home runs, the hitter on the winning walk-off hit should be credited with advancing exactly as many bases as the winning run."

Actually, in the modern examples, if the winning run starts on first, it's still a walk-off double. In the Longoria example I quoted above, from the video it appears he did run to 2B, too. So, in OOTP if the game 'rolls' a triple and scores the winning run, it should probably be downgraded to a double.

[Nutlaw]

Originally Posted by Eckstein 4 Prez

If we're putting this into a rule that OOTP can incorporate, it should be, "Except for home runs, the hitter on the winning walk-off hit should be credited with advancing exactly as many bases as the winning run."

BZ 1986