Game Called? Seriously?

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Certainly. But if the weather forecast showed a bad one coming, I'd expect in real life they'd call the game at a point where it could have been suspended (or outright postpone it). Once a game is started, I'd expect they'd be prepared to wait several hours for the storm to pass in order to complete the game. The only way I could see that not happening is if one or both clubs had to catch flights out of town for other games.

Or if the storm was going to last a long time. I can remember being rained on for ten days straight once.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by gads

Thanks for confirming that I was right.

I'm not sure when the change was made. I think it might have been as far back as the 1950s—I do remember the leagues experimenting with changes to the suspended game rules during that decade. One could probably narrow it down by examining the Retrosheet game logs, which include info on when games were suspended as well as the number of outs games lasted.

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

No, those are the (rather) old rules. If a game was called during an inning and the visiting team had either scored to tie the game or take the lead, and the home team had not yet completed its half of the inning, then the score would revert to the last completed inning (which could mean a victory for the home club depending on what the score was).

That rule was changed so that such games became suspended instead. If the home club is ahead in its half of the inning when the game is called, as long as it's a regulation game, it becomes a final result.

Yes, the rule was changed the following year, but at the time, they were going to take the runs off, I was up at 4 am that night watching, and the Cardnals fought hard to get it called so they would get the win.

And although that rule has changed, the game the op is talking about can be seen as a simiar situation where a real life umpire crew might use their own judgment to avoid a controversial ending

[gads]

Originally Posted by Mortimer

Yes, the rule was changed the following year, but at the time, they were going to take the runs off, I was up at 4 am that night watching, and the Cardinals fought hard to get it called so they would get the win.

And although that rule has changed, the game the op is talking about can be seen as a similar situation where a real life umpire crew might use their own judgement to avoid a controversial ending

The rule was changed much earlier than that.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Mortimer

Yes, the rule was changed the following year ...

I'm pretty sure it was changed well before 2013. The Official Baseball Rules for 2013 and 2014 are identical insofar as their treatment of when games can be suspended is concerned.

[Mortimer]

What ever guys, I'm not arguing, I know what I saw, it was after the 5th inning I am 90% sure it was 2013 if not it was 2012, at least the Royals annoucers were saying if called they would give up the 2 runs going back to the start of the inning.

I remember the Cardinals manager was pissed, and the ground crew tried to say it was too muddy. It was one of the damnest things I have ever seen in baseball..http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...osmer/2375213/

[Biggio509]

Originally Posted by TwinsGuy11

I understand the rules and get that the game is counted after 5 innings. But like it has been said, IRL the inning would have been played out.

Again, whatever. Still love the game and I probably won't come across it again, but man it sucked.

I do remember a game with the Astros a few years ago where the game was suspended but played as part of a double header later. The game began again after suspension with players on base with the outs and pitch count where it was when the game was suspended. I think that is very rare though.

[TwinsGuy11]

Originally Posted by Biggio509

I do remember a game with the Astros a few years ago where the game was suspended but played as part of a double header later. The game began again after suspension with players on base with the outs and pitch count where it was when the game was suspended. I think that is very rare though.

Yeah I remember a Twins game where the game had to be postponed because there was a Gophers football game that night. I got to see the ending of that game and another full game the next day. It was awesome!

[TwinsGuy11]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Not if the weather got bad enough, it wouldn't. That's what you're just not comprehending.

I just don't see any crew allowing a game to end like that. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't think it would happen.

[Lou Gehrig]

You just don't get it. The crew does not have control over the weather. It happens.

I guess next you'll want Markus to add a weather radar system to better analyze the weather forecast.

[Otis Cardinal-fan]

This thread reminded of a ballgame I saw in St. Louis with my brother years ago. I clearly remember the crazy rain delay in the 9th inning. My brother and I didn't have particularly good seats for this game, so we were both hoping for a blowout or a rain delay to chase people out of Busch Stadium and allow us to sneak down to the lower deck. Well, it came a pretty good storm in the top of the ninth. We waited it out and really didn't think the game would continue. What made matters worse was the fact that the Cardinals and the umpiring crew really wanted to finish the game without bringing out the tarp. Mother nature did not cooperate. It poured, soaking the infield. It rained so hard, the tarp filled with water before they could cover the infield. After a lengthy delay, the ground crew began bringing out pallets of the drying agent onto the field. They worked at a feverish pace for what seemed like hours, until they finally got the field in good enough shape that they brought the players back out onto the field to finish the ninth. Most of the fans had left. My brother and I had walked down to the front row on the third base side. The concrete floor in that section was flooded and over ankle deep, mainly because all the peanut shells were clogging up the drains. We didn't care. That was the closest I have ever been to the live action and it was awesome! We got a warning from the security guy on the field near that section about touching live baseballs. Scott Rolen played third for the Cardinals that year. I remember it seemed like we were so close that we could reach out and shake hands with him. Anyway, I searched for almost an hour before I finally found the exact date and game.
May 26, 2007 vs the Washington Nationals. Craziest game I ever saw.

Washington Nationals vs. St. Louis Cardinals, New Busch Stadium, St. Louis, Missouri - May 26, 2007

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by TwinsGuy11

I just don't see any crew allowing a game to end like that. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't think it would happen.

They have to end the game, NO MATTER WHAT, if the weather conditions are unsafe. It's not a choice; they have to end it.

[Otis Cardinal-fan]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

They have to end the game, NO MATTER WHAT, if the weather conditions are unsafe. It's not a choice; they have to end it.

The choice is in what constitutes unsafe. Different people are going to judge "unsafe" differently in different situations. The home team and the home team's ground crew have a big say over whether or not a game is called or suspended. The umpire is the one to ultimately make the call, but he is making that call based on information that is being given to him by local authority, ground crew capabilities, local weather forecasters, etc. In the example I provided in previous post, that game would not have been possible to finish if not for the fact the the Cardinal ground crew not only had a huge stock of drying agent, but also the means to get it onto the field quickly and the manpower to spread it. Click on the link at the bottom of the post, look through the pictures and see for yourself.

[The Wolf]

I feel like I'm having a discussion with small children. When conditions are unsafe - not borderline, but unsafe, and yes they get that way, I've been there - they have to call the game. They have no choice. You get a nearby lightning strike or hard hail or pounding rain and the situation is clearly unsafe and the game is called.

[OldFatGuy]

Originally Posted by Mortimer

from the link....
Umpire crew chief Joe West opted for patience and declined to invoke a rule clause in the final season meeting between teams that would have wiped out the top of the ninth and declared the Cardinals 2-1 winners.

Dated May 2013, so yeah, it must have changed after that.


Congrats on your good memory. Wish mine was that good....

[gads]

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

Dated May 2013, so yeah, it must have changed after that.


Congrats on your good memory. Wish mine was that good....

The clause is 4.12(b)(4)(i) which states "Any suspended game not completed prior to the last scheduled game between the two teams during the championship season shall become a called game, as follows: (i) If such game has progressed far enough to become a regulation game, and one team is ahead, the team that is ahead shall be declared the winner (unless the game is called while an inning is in progress and before the inning is completed, and the visiting team has scored one or more runs to take the lead, and the home team has not retaken the lead, in which case the score upon the completion of the last full inning shall stand for purposes of this Rule 4.12(b)(4))."

It so happens that it was the last game between the two teams that season. However, the standard 4.12(a) rules that LGO and I were talking about had been in place way before 2013.

A New MLB Rule Forced Royals-Cardinals To Go 8 Soggy Hours

[gads]

For those that are interested, 4.12(b)(4)(ii) is "Any suspended game not completed prior to the last scheduled game between the two teams during the championship season shall be a called game if such game has progressed far enough to become a regulation game, and the score is tied, the game shall be declared a "tie game" (unless the game is called while an inning is in progress and before the inning is completed, and the visiting team has scored one or more runs to tie the game, and the home team has not retied the game, in which case the score upon the completion of the last full inning shall stand for purposes of this Rule 4.12(b)(4)). A tie game is to be replayed in its entirety, unless the league president determines that playing the rescheduled game is not necessary to affect the league championship."

So for example, after 8 innings, Visiting Team (VT) has 5 and Home Team (HT) has 6.

Case 1: The game gets called at the top of the 9th with the score at 6-6. Because the HT has not retied the game, HT is declared the winner because the score at the end of the 8th inning is used in this case.

Case 2: The game gets called at the bottom of the 9th with the score at 7-7, 8-8 or any higher tied score. Because the HT has retied the game, the game shall be declared a "tie game".

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by gads

It so happens that it was the last game between the two teams that season. However, the standard 4.12(a) rules that LGO and I were talking about had been in place way before 2013.

Correct.

Now I'm getting curious about just how the suspended game rules have changed, so if I get the chance over the next few days I'll dig through the online issues of The Sporting News and see if I can find any details.

[Mancandy]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

They have to end the game, NO MATTER WHAT, if the weather conditions are unsafe. It's not a choice; they have to end it.

Umpires DO. NOT. CALL. GAMES. THAT. QUICKLY. PERIOD. If the biblical storm you're ranting about was coming in, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE STARTED THE GAME. It would have been postponed BEFORE THE OPENING PITCH. It would have been postponed HOURS before any fans WALKED IN THE STADIUM.

Originally Posted by The Wolf

I feel like I'm having a discussion with small children. When conditions are unsafe - not borderline, but unsafe, and yes they get that way, I've been there - they have to call the game. They have no choice. You get a nearby lightning strike or hard hail or pounding rain and the situation is clearly unsafe and the game is called.

MOD EDIT: Removed the personal attacks and gave an Infraction as a result. I've also removed inflammatory and aggressive language at several points throughout the post.

Lightning strikes and hail are a regular part of rain delays. TV networks always get a kick out of showing the players getting startled by lightning while they're sitting in the dugout during the rain delay. To say those games are automatically called just [Snipped] has no basis in reality. That may be true at little league games where there's no cover for spectators or players, but it is certainly nowhere close to being true at higher levels of professional ball, and to imply it would even be considered at the major league level is just [Snipped] misguided. Unsafe conditions bring about a standard rain delay, nothing more and nothing less. You might as well say games have to be called when there's an eclipse or a full moon [Snipped] to support your [Snipped] theory that you want to continue clinging to for some unknown reason.

[DB930]

It'd be cool if, in a future version, they could get the game to recognize that something like this is a special situation (close game, tying or go-ahead runs on base), and allow for the fact that the RL umpires would make every effort to at the very least finish that half-inning... but also include a trigger that would make the possibility of injury go up as they play thru the wet weather...