PDA

View Full Version : Jeff Weaver, currently losing 1-0, has a no-no in the 6th


Viva Medias B's
06-28-2008, 10:53 PM
The Dodgers scored a run off Weaver in the fifth without the benefit of a bast it.

sox1970
06-28-2008, 11:03 PM
This could be an Andy Hawkins special.

JB98
06-28-2008, 11:06 PM
It's actually Jered Weaver.

If he throws eight no-hit innings and gets beat 1-0, does he still get credit for a no-hitter? Didn't they change a rule on that some years back?

JB98
06-28-2008, 11:07 PM
Weaver was just taken down for a pinch-hitter. So, it will be a combined no-hitter, if anything.

sox1970
06-28-2008, 11:07 PM
It's actually Jered Weaver.

If he throws eight no-hit innings and gets beat 1-0, does he still get credit for a no-hitter? Didn't they change a rule on that some years back?

I think he still gets credit. It's the rain shortened no-hitters that don't count--like Melido Perez had with the Sox.

sox1970
06-28-2008, 11:08 PM
Weaver had 97 pitches, so probably a good move.

Viva Medias B's
06-28-2008, 11:11 PM
Weaver had 97 pitches, so probably a good move.

:ozzie
"If I made a move like that, the media would **** all over me!"

Whitesox029
06-28-2008, 11:13 PM
It's actually Jered Weaver. And Scioscia pinch-hit for him in the top of the 7th.
edit--whoops, you guys are way ahead of me!

Viva Medias B's
06-28-2008, 11:17 PM
No-no continues through 7.

DSpivack
06-28-2008, 11:18 PM
I think he still gets credit. It's the rain shortened no-hitters that don't count--like Melido Perez had with the Sox.

I thought they changed that it doesn't count. I think Andy Hawkins' no-hitter is now unofficial.

sox1970
06-28-2008, 11:19 PM
I thought they changed that it doesn't count. I think Andy Hawkins' no-hitter is now unofficial.

Yeah, I think you're right. They said that on Baseball Tonight.

DSpivack
06-28-2008, 11:23 PM
Yeah, I think you're right. They said that on Baseball Tonight.

Well, there's a few different rules here; a no-hitter with a loss; a no hitter short of 9 innings (8 in a road loss or rain-shortened); and a combined no-hitter. I believe only the latter qualifies, as the Astros did at Yankee Stadium a few years ago (the starter left after 5 with an injury, I believe). Also, I think a lost no-hitter also does not count (i.e. 9 innings of no-hit ball, give up a hit in extras).

jabrch
06-28-2008, 11:23 PM
Weaver was just taken down for a pinch-hitter. So, it will be a combined no-hitter, if anything.

Scoscia is a great manager...Kudos to him for having the stones to not press his luck and to recognize that the win for his team is MUCH more important than the no hitter.

sox1970
06-28-2008, 11:26 PM
They're showing the game on ESPN now.

Viva Medias B's
06-28-2008, 11:27 PM
Now that I think of this, should the Angels get the no-no, how many no-hitters have been called by Vin Scully? I can think of probalby six off the top of my head. One was Don Larsen throwing a perfect game against Scully's Dodgers in the 1956 World Series. Sandy Koufax threw four no-hitters, including a perfect game against the Cubs. And while he was with NBC, Scully called a Jack Morris no-hitter against us in 1984.

Sockinchisox
06-28-2008, 11:31 PM
8 IP of no hit ball by the Angels.

I hope they tie this up.

JB98
06-28-2008, 11:31 PM
No-hitter through eight.

The Angels need a run here, or else they lose a game in which they gave up no hits.

RadioheadRocks
06-28-2008, 11:33 PM
I think he still gets credit. It's the rain shortened no-hitters that don't count--like Melido Perez had with the Sox.


Don't both pitchers get the credit if it's a combined effort, like Blue Moon Odom and Francisco Barrios did for the White Sox back in 1976?

DSpivack
06-28-2008, 11:33 PM
Don't both pitchers get the credit if it's a combined effort, like Blue Moon Odom and Francisco Barrios did for the White Sox back in 1976?

I believe all of the Astros do (I believe Oswalt and Dotel off the top of my head), not sure.

RadioheadRocks
06-28-2008, 11:35 PM
I thought they changed that it doesn't count. I think Andy Hawkins' no-hitter is now unofficial.

Yeah, I think you're right. They said that on Baseball Tonight.

Well, there's a few different rules here; a no-hitter with a loss; a no hitter short of 9 innings (8 in a road loss or rain-shortened); and a combined no-hitter. I believe only the latter qualifies, as the Astros did at Yankee Stadium a few years ago (the starter left after 5 with an injury, I believe). Also, I think a lost no-hitter also does not count (i.e. 9 innings of no-hit ball, give up a hit in extras).

We have fuddy-duddy Fay Vincent to thank for that. While I'll agree about the rain-shortened no-hitters, it certainly wasn't Hawkins' fault he got that loss and the White Sox didn't have to bat in the bottom of the 9th, and 18 years later that box score still reads the Sox won with 4 runs on NO hits.

Suck it, Fay.

sox1970
06-28-2008, 11:36 PM
We have fuddy-duddy Fay Vincent to thank for that. While I'll agree about the rain-shortened no-hitters, it certainly wasn't Hawkins' fault he got that loss and the White Sox didn't have to bat in the bottom of the 9th, and 18 years later that box score still reads the Sox won with 4 runs on NO hits.

Suck it, Fay.

Agreed. It's like a complete game when you lose on the road.

Jjav829
06-28-2008, 11:37 PM
This is great. DirecTV isn't showing the Angels-Dodgers game. So I tune into BBTN for the first time in a long time and hey, they're showing the game! Alright! Bottom of the 8th. 3 outs. No-hitter still intact. Cool. Let's go to the 9th and see if Saito can finish this out, right? Nope. Instead we get Chris Singleton singing 'Take me out to the ballgame.' :rolleyes:

I remember why I don't watch BBTN much anymore.

Hitmen77
06-28-2008, 11:37 PM
I think he still gets credit. It's the rain shortened no-hitters that don't count--like Melido Perez had with the Sox.

No he doesn't. MLB's current rules say anything short of 9 IP doesn't count. So, Andy Hawkins doesn't get credit for a no hitter and neither would the Angels.

sox1970
06-28-2008, 11:38 PM
This is great. DirecTV isn't showing the Angels-Dodgers game. So I tune into BBTN for the first time in a long time and hey, they're showing the game! Alright! Bottom of the 8th. 3 outs. No-hitter still intact. Cool. Let's go to the 9th and see if Saito can finish this out, right? Nope. Instead we get Chris Singleton singing 'Take me out to the ballgame.' :rolleyes:

I remember why I don't watch BBTN much anymore.

No kidding. Singleton: Buy me some peanuts and Cracker Jacks.

Idiot.

DSpivack
06-28-2008, 11:39 PM
Kendrick doubles, tying run on 2nd.

sox1970
06-28-2008, 11:41 PM
If they're going to show the bottom of the 8th, they should show the top of the 9th too. What the ****.

WhiteSoxOnly
06-28-2008, 11:42 PM
Kendrick doubles, tying run on 2nd.

Kendrick should have been out on strikes on that 1-2 pitch.

DSpivack
06-28-2008, 11:42 PM
Kendrick should have been out on strikes on that 1-2 pitch.

That was way outside.

Saito walks Napoli, Willits up.

JB98
06-28-2008, 11:44 PM
Willits is hitting .169 this year.

WhiteSoxOnly
06-28-2008, 11:44 PM
Modern day strike zone...there isn't one.

DSpivack
06-28-2008, 11:45 PM
It's over!

Viva Medias B's
06-28-2008, 11:45 PM
A no-hitter for the Angels in a losing effort.

jabrch
06-28-2008, 11:45 PM
Willits is hitting .169 this year.

Where are the folks who wanted KW to trade a ton to get this guy?

JB98
06-28-2008, 11:46 PM
Now, Willits is hitting .167.

The Angels have a weak offense this year.

Nellie_Fox
06-29-2008, 12:10 AM
A no-hitter for the Angels in a losing effort.A no-hitter must be nine innings. Since the Dodgers didn't have to bat in the bottom of the ninth, the Angels' pitchers only pitched eight innings, so it's not a no-hitter.

PKalltheway
06-29-2008, 12:30 AM
Haha, one of those crazy quirks about baseball. That's why baseball is so awesome.:cool:

Now that I think of this, should the Angels get the no-no, how many no-hitters have been called by Vin Scully? I can think of probalby six off the top of my head. One was Don Larsen throwing a perfect game against Scully's Dodgers in the 1956 World Series. Sandy Koufax threw four no-hitters, including a perfect game against the Cubs. And while he was with NBC, Scully called a Jack Morris no-hitter against us in 1984.
Also, to my knowledge, he called the Dennis Martinez perfect game against the Dodgers, as well as the Tom Browning perfect game against them. Ramon Martinez threw a no-hitter some time ago with the Dodgers, and he called Nolan Ryan's 5th career no-no against the Dodgers.

TDog
06-29-2008, 01:18 AM
Now that I think of this, should the Angels get the no-no, how many no-hitters have been called by Vin Scully? I can think of probalby six off the top of my head. One was Don Larsen throwing a perfect game against Scully's Dodgers in the 1956 World Series. Sandy Koufax threw four no-hitters, including a perfect game against the Cubs. And while he was with NBC, Scully called a Jack Morris no-hitter against us in 1984.

According to the Dodgers Web site, Vin Scully has called 18 no-hitters and three perfect games (excluding Kevin Costner's).

Tonight's game didn't count as a no-hitter, either, and it shouldn't have. If the elements or your team losing prevents you from pitching nine innings, you shouldn't get credit for a no-hitter. There is a separate list of pitchers who pitched complete games without giving up any hits but didn't make it to the ninth.

PaleHoseGeorge
06-29-2008, 10:13 AM
According to the Dodgers Web site, Vin Scully has called 18 no-hitters and three perfect games (excluding Kevin Costner's).

Tonight's game didn't count as a no-hitter, either, and it shouldn't have. If the elements or your team losing prevents you from pitching nine innings, you shouldn't get credit for a no-hitter. There is a separate list of pitchers who pitched complete games without giving up any hits but didn't make it to the ninth.

I completely disagree. It's called a "No-Hitter" not a "hitless win" for a reason.

Andy Hawkins did everything he humanly could standing on the mound at Old Comiskey on July 1, 1990. For eight innings he held the White Sox hitless. The fact his own teammates couldn't score a run and committed errors in the field had absolutely NOTHING to do with Andy Hawkins pitching a no-hitter on the mound.

Then you would deny Hawkins credit for a no-hitter because he didn't pitch a half-inning that by the rules is never even played? Only a putz the size of Faye Vincent could ever dream up a ruling based on half-baked "logic" like that.

What next, Faye? Hitting for the cycle doesn't count unless your team wins, too?
:kukoo:

I think it is also noteworthy that the details sketched in the two short paragraphs above were completely absent from the Tribune's sports coverage this morning. Absolutely no mention of the 1990 Sox game being the last time this sort of "non" no-hitter was achieved. I'm guessing their 21 year-old intern working the weekend graveyard weekend editor's desk didn't know enough about Sox baseball to include such an obvious reference missing from the AP wire story he merely cut and pasted into the paper.

Forget about bias. This is just plain incompetence, nothing more and nothing less. They missed the Chicago angle to the story... and now that their readership and advertising revenue have reached critical lows, the entire newspaper is about to be gutted. Can't say they haven't got it coming.

Lip Man 1
06-29-2008, 12:17 PM
PHG:

Actually the last time this happened was in 1992 when Matt Young of the Red Sox threw an eight inning "no-hitter" against Cleveland...and lost.

Lip

RKMeibalane
06-29-2008, 12:38 PM
I completely disagree. It's called a "No-Hitter" not a "hitless win" for a reason.

Andy Hawkins did everything he humanly could standing on the mound at Old Comiskey on July 1, 1990. For eight innings he held the White Sox hitless. The fact his own teammates couldn't score a run and committed errors in the field had absolutely NOTHING to do with Andy Hawkins pitching a no-hitter on the mound.

Then you would deny Hawkins credit for a no-hitter because he didn't pitch a half-inning that by the rules is never even played? Only a putz the size of Faye Vincent could ever dream up a ruling based on half-baked "logic" like that.

What next, Faye? Hitting for the cycle doesn't count unless your team wins, too?
:kukoo:

I think it is also noteworthy that the details sketched in the two short paragraphs above were completely absent from the Tribune's sports coverage this morning. Absolutely no mention of the 1990 Sox game being the last time this sort of "non" no-hitter was achieved. I'm guessing their 21 year-old intern working the weekend graveyard weekend editor's desk didn't know enough about Sox baseball to include such an obvious reference missing from the AP wire story he merely cut and pasted into the paper.

Forget about bias. This is just plain incompetence, nothing more and nothing less. They missed the Chicago angle to the story... and now that their readership and advertising revenue have reached critical lows, the entire newspaper is about to be gutted. Can't say they haven't got it coming.

Agreed. The Angels pitching staff deserves credit for completely shutting down the Dodgers offense, regardless of whether they won the game or not. The fact that the game didn't last for the full nine innings shouldn't matter. All of the other statistics from the game count. Why shouldn't the Angels get credit for a combined no-hitter?

TDog
06-29-2008, 01:07 PM
I completely disagree. It's called a "No-Hitter" not a "hitless win" for a reason.

Andy Hawkins did everything he humanly could standing on the mound at Old Comiskey on July 1, 1990. For eight innings he held the White Sox hitless. The fact his own teammates couldn't score a run and committed errors in the field had absolutely NOTHING to do with Andy Hawkins pitching a no-hitter on the mound.

Then you would deny Hawkins credit for a no-hitter because he didn't pitch a half-inning that by the rules is never even played? Only a putz the size of Faye Vincent could ever dream up a ruling based on half-baked "logic" like that.

What next, Faye? Hitting for the cycle doesn't count unless your team wins, too?
:kukoo:

I think it is also noteworthy that the details sketched in the two short paragraphs above were completely absent from the Tribune's sports coverage this morning. Absolutely no mention of the 1990 Sox game being the last time this sort of "non" no-hitter was achieved. I'm guessing their 21 year-old intern working the weekend graveyard weekend editor's desk didn't know enough about Sox baseball to include such an obvious reference missing from the AP wire story he merely cut and pasted into the paper.

Forget about bias. This is just plain incompetence, nothing more and nothing less. They missed the Chicago angle to the story... and now that their readership and advertising revenue have reached critical lows, the entire newspaper is about to be gutted. Can't say they haven't got it coming.

It's not a matter of your team winning. If the Sox had failed to score on May 6 and Gavin Floyd had retired Joe Mauer and stayed in the game to retire the next hitter, he would have gotten credit for a no-hitter in a 1-0 loss.

It's a matter of a pitcher pitching nine innings. In the minors (I don't know if they still do) teams used to play a lot of doubleheaders with two seven-inning games. Most minor league no-hitters were seven-inning games, and the Baseball Register would note "seven-inning no-hitter" instead of "no-hitter" in relating the pitcher's achievements. Stan Bahnsen pitched a seven-inning no-hitter when he was coming up through the Yankees system in the 1960s. If he had retired Walt "No-Neck" Williams in the ninth inning on Aug. 21, 1973, the Baseball Register would have noted a no-hitter, not a nine-inning no-hitter, because nine-innings is the standard for no-hitters.

Saturday night, Jered Weaver only pitched six innings, anyway. Nonetheless, in the Baseball Register (if The Sporting News isn't too busy focusing on inferior sports to still publish it) will not that Jered Weaver pitched six-innings of a combined eight-inning no-hitter.

Dean Chance pitched a no-hitter for the Twins in 1967, a couple of weeks before Joe Horlen pitched a no-hitter for the White Sox. A couple of weeks before that, Chance pitched a five-inning rain shortened no-hitter. There is a reason Chance isn't listed with people such as Virgil Trucks, Allie Reynolds and Johnny Vander Meer as pitchers who threw two no-hitters in a season.

PaleHoseGeorge
06-29-2008, 04:25 PM
It's not a matter of your team winning. If the Sox had failed to score on May 6 and Gavin Floyd had retired Joe Mauer and stayed in the game to retire the next hitter, he would have gotten credit for a no-hitter in a 1-0 loss.

It's a matter of a pitcher pitching nine innings. .....

Saturday night, Jered Weaver only pitched six innings, anyway. Nonetheless, in the Baseball Register (if The Sporting News isn't too busy focusing on inferior sports to still publish it) will not that Jered Weaver pitched six-innings of a combined eight-inning no-hitter.

And of course you must admit it is always the MANAGER'S responsibility to utilize either a pitcher throwing a no-hitter or bring in another pitcher from the bullpen -- whichever gives his team the best chance of winning. Isn't this right?

Scioscia pulled Weaver for a pinch-hitter; that was his choice. Obviously Weaver "sharing" a no-hitter with another pitcher is no great accomplishment; His own manager pulled the plug on him!

By contrast, Hawkins threw all eight innings for the Yankees and never got to pitch the last-half of an inning for what would otherwise have been a full nine inning effort if not for the incompetence of his own teammates. Comparing his circumstances to that of a rain-shortened game or Jared Weaver getting pulled early makes no sense at all.


Dean Chance pitched a no-hitter for the Twins in 1967, a couple of weeks before Joe Horlen pitched a no-hitter for the White Sox. A couple of weeks before that, Chance pitched a five-inning rain shortened no-hitter. There is a reason Chance isn't listed with people such as Virgil Trucks, Allie Reynolds and Johnny Vander Meer as pitchers who threw two no-hitters in a season.When a pitcher achieving what he can in spite of his teammates' incompetence is to be regarded the equal to that of an Act of God, you'll have made a magnificent point. Until then...

Eddo144
06-29-2008, 04:59 PM
When a pitcher achieving what he can in spite of his teammates' incompetence is to be regarded the equal to that of an Act of God, you'll have made a magnificent point. Until then...
I'm not sure what you're arguing. All TDog did was point out what constitutes an official no-hitter in the eyes of Major League Baseball.

RadioheadRocks
06-29-2008, 11:14 PM
I'm not sure what you're arguing. All TDog did was point out what constitutes an official no-hitter in the eyes of Major League Baseball.


Yeah, according to fuddy-duddy Fay Vincent's ruling while he was commissioner, like I pointed out in my earlier post. :rolleyes:

TDog
06-30-2008, 12:34 AM
...


When a pitcher achieving what he can in spite of his teammates' incompetence is to be regarded the equal to that of an Act of God, you'll have made a magnificent point. Until then...

The lone run that scored in LA Saturday night reached base on an error by Weaver, so Weaver contributed to his teammates' incompetence. If Weaver doesn't make the error, he doesn't give up the sacrifice fly and maybe he stays in the game.

Or maybe he gives up a hit in the seventh. The hitters have already seen him twice. There are more no-hitters broken up in the seventh, eighth and ninth than there are no-hitters. If you give up no hits thorugh six, you are still a longshot to pitch a nine-inning no hitter. I don't see he could have pitched a real nine-inning no hitter, considering the importance people put on pitch counts these days. Weaver threw 97 pitches through six. He probably would have tired and given up a hit if he had to go nine. That's part of what makes regulation no-hitters more difficult.

In any case, there is a list of true regulation no-hitters where pitchers have to get 27 outs and there is a list of shared no-hitters and a list of short no-hitters, whether they were shortened by acts of God or the incompetence of teammates or the incompetence of pitchers themselves who could possible have walked in a run or two.

I imagine there have players who fell just a single away from a cycle but didn't get the opportunity because their team didn't bat in the ninth. It doesn't matter why you didn't get that last hit, and it doesn't matter why you didn't get the necessary 27 outs.