They were Haren's baserunners. It's a pretty dumb system, but not near as dumb as assigning wins and losses, saves, and holds.
he had 2 on, left, and one of the 2 scored. the other was out at home. Unless there's some rule I'm unaware of.
I know nothing about the situation we're discussing, but ALL inherited baserunners count against the pitcher who let them on.
Okay, I looked at this: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/inde...box#gid=2012_04_22_balmlb_anamlb_1&mode=plays Wieters and Andino were put on by Haren. Endy Chavez singles on a soft fly ball to center fielder Peter Bourjos. Matt Wieters to 3rd. Robert Andino to 2nd. J. Hardy grounds into a force out, pitcher Scott Downs to catcher Bobby Wilson. Matt Wieters out at home. Robert Andino to 3rd. Endy Chavez to 2nd. J. Hardy to 1st. Nick Markakis singles on a ground ball to left fielder Vernon Wells. Robert Andino scores. Endy Chavez scores. J. Hardy to 3rd. So, Haren's runners were at 2nd and 3rd, Downs' runner at 1st. Hardy bats, Weiters is out on a Fielder's choice at home, Haren's other runner to 3rd, Downs' runners to 1st and 2nd. Next play, Haren's 3B runner and Downs' 2B runner score. Obviously, the Fielder's Choice should've cleared Haren of the responsibility for 1 run, since Matt Wieters was out at home. Is there any chance a fielder's choice means "nope, you're still on the hook for 2 runners since the base situation didn't change"? I googled "inherited runners fielder's choice" and found nothing.
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/official_scorer_10.jsp Rule 10.16 (g) (g) When pitchers are changed during an inning, the official scorer shall not charge the relief pitcher with any run (earned or unearned) scored by a runner who was on base at the time such relief pitcher entered the game, nor for runs scored by any runner who reaches base on a fielder's choice that puts out a runner left on base by any preceding pitcher. Rule 10.16(g) Comment: It is the intent of Rule 10.16(g) to charge each pitcher with the number of runners he put on base, rather than with the individual runners. When a pitcher puts runners on base and is relieved, such pitcher shall be charged with all runs subsequently scored up to and including the number of runners such pitcher left on base when such pitcher left the game, unless such runners are put out without action by the batter (i.e., caught stealing, picked off base or called out for interference when a batter-runner does not reach first base on the play). So, you cannot "lose" an inherited runner because of an out by fielder's choice. Haren put on 2 runners, and Matt Wieters was only out via FC, so the runner who "replaced" him in bases loaded still counts for Haren. Still a pretty weird rule, but it's laid out right there in the official rules.
The Cardinals never relied on just Pujols. I can remember tons of big innings where Pujols contributed nada. The balance has been there for years. Hell, we won the World Series last year with Pujols doing not much in the World Series except for his Game 3 ridiculousness.
I watched Twins @ Tampa Bay game yesterday. People that go to ballgames, sit by the edge sit and interfere with foul balls on play are THE WORST EVER. If a player has a chance to make a play, even if it's the visitor team, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE WAY. I mad.
Not surprising. We've been getting Boston/New York shoved down our throats for years now. People say "it's a business", but networks like ESPN don't even bother hyping up other teams. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. Boston and New York give them the highest ratings because that's all anyone gets to see/hear about on their network.
Don't forget though that Tiger Stadium doesn't exist anymore. 100 years is a long time for a park to be open. 87 is too, obviously, but they're not going to celebrate the opening of a stadium that closed 13 years ago. Still, fuck Boston and New York.
The point is Tiger Stadium has just as many memorable moments as Fenway, and the city refuses to even acknowledge The Corner's historical relevance at ALL. They're trying to farm it out to commercialization that wants nothing to do with Detroit in the first place. So while the happys in Boston klink Welch's and celebrate another loss in their 100 year old stadium, fans in Detroit take it upon themselves to mow the grass and chalk the sand of what was once a glorious monument - because the city sure as fuck won't.
Yeah, I mean that's fine if Detroit wants to recognize it (but they didn't) but I was getting pissed off at ESPN covering Fenway's 100th anniversary. I quite literally could not care any less about that. I don't see why anybody there thought that anybody outside of Boston would care at all about some stupid anniversary. Oh yeah, cause ESPN is located in Connecticut
They even commented yesterday at one point about how people all over the offices at ESPN were shaking their heads at the Bobby Valentine fiasco thus far. The easy interpretation there is that most of the people that work there are local, or in other words, Red Sox fans. It sure explains the Boston bias in every respect when it comes to coverage and whatnot. The defending champs are off to a great start here in St. Louis despite losing the best player of this generation, but who cares about that? Let's keep talking about the train wreck in Beantown.
Unfortunately, there are bandwagon Red Sox fans everywhere. It's sickening. Watch any road game. You will see probably about 40-50% Red Sox fans there and perhaps more if the home team has poor attendance to begin with. ESPN and FOX will continue to rape us with them until they stop giving them ratings.
There are bandwagon fans for every franchise that wins. That's just how it is. Why would there be bandwagoners for Kansas City or Pittsburgh? If you care about the game, you can always ignore the bias and just look up stats by yourself. Or cancel your cable subscription like I did. As a Yankees fan, it bothers me every time I find a so called "yankees fan" that has no fucking idea who plays for the team, and only bought the hat just because he saw Jay Z or some other asshole rapper wearing it. Or every single person on facebook that has never watched a baseball game but can't help to say "LOL YANKEES SUCK GO RED SOX THE RIVALRY LMAO U SUCK LOL" I mad, I jelly, etc.
I'm gonna fucking punch a....ahh fuck it. No use having more passion for this team than the actual players do.
Pujols joins the Angels and just completely forgets how to hit. It's terrible when every time he gets up I know he's going to make an out. Vernon Wells > Pujols.
I think he'll pick it up, maybe it's more of an adjustment than people realize. He started this exact way last year and still wound up with a really good year. But this is what you get when you give a ridiculous contract to someone already showing 2-3 years of decline.
I seriously don't know what to say anymore. I'm praying Mike Scioscia will get fired, but I know he won't.
Given Delmon Young's defense, I wouldn't be surprised if these charges were dropped -Deadspin comment
http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/story/_/id/7865074/bobby-abreu-released-los-angeles-angels This is Scary ed after reading that article:
Picked up both Bryce Harper and Mike Trout in my league just now. I thought for sure at least Harper was gone but no. Awesome.
