Why is this rule still in effect ???

[OFFNY]

This thread's most recent source is today's Tigers-Rays game, but if and when this happens to the Orioles later on this season, we'll be talking about it like crazy ........ especially if the Orioles are the team that is inconvenienced. I've mentioned the absurdity of the rule many times, although I (and a few others) kidded about it on the game thread when the Yankees were beating our brains in last week, and it looked like there was a possibility that said game would have been wiped out.

This afternoon, a game that was started and halted because of rain was completely wiped and postponed until June 13. The Tigers jumped out to a quick 2-0 lead in the bottom of the first, but because 5 innings were not completed, the results were completely negated, and the game will be replayed in its entirety. Now ....... it could have been worse. One of these teams could have had an 8-1 lead after 4 innings, and the rains could have come then, sparking what would be an outrageous injustice. Dave (the former pitcher) Johnson spoke of the ridiculous nature of this rule last year, while one of the Orioles' games was in a rain delay. Not only is the rule blatantly unfair to the team that is winning the game (especially if they are winning by a lot), but it also can encourage a team to intentionally make outs as quickly as possible. For example, if the rains start getting harder in the 3rd or 4th inning, a team that has a lead by at least 3 or 4 runs might actually consider sacrificing their at-bats in an attempt to rush the game along so as to get the required 5 innings in.

Some of you long-time Oriole fans might remember a game in 1978, in which the Orioles were losing to the Yankees at Memorial Stadium ......... BUT ........ the Yankees had scored 5 runs in the top half of the 7th inning to take the lead, and because of the fact that the Orioles were unable to complete their at-bats in the bottom half of the inning (due to heavy rains which continued until the field was unplayable to resume the game), the rule pushed the results of the game back to the most recently-completed inning, which was before the Yankees' offensive outburst, which subsequently awarded the Orioles the victory (Rule 4.12). That very off-season they changed that particular rule, and made it so that if that specific circumstance ever occurred again, the team in the top half of the inning would not be penalized (as were the Yankees that game) and have their runs taken away, and the the game would be continued to its completion at a future (dryer) date.

So ....... why would one rule be changed to prevent a team from being penalized, but another rule remain in effect, which would still penalize a team under similar circumstances ??? It's a rhetorical question, so feel free to discuss it.

P.S. This is the boxscore from the 1978 game against the Yankees (along with an accompanying article explaining what happened) in which we were the benficiaries of the rule that was subsequently changed that very off-season.

A. http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/BAL/BAL197808130.shtml

B. http://www.todayinbaseball.com/cms/081310-weaver

C. http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20110525/SPORTS0104/105250444/1004/Tigers-Rays-game-postponed-until-June-13

[isestrex]

This happened earlier on May 11th between the Athletics and Rangers where Gio Gonzalez (who currently has a pristine 2.20 ERA) gave up 7 runs in 3 innings including a grand slam to a lefty (Mitch Moreland). However the game was wiped out because of rain and now those stats "don't count". Gio's outstanding numbers against lefties are falsified slightly and his ERA is complete mirage so far with only 2 months of the season.

ESPN's Baseball Today podcast ranted and raved about this issue (and that game) for a bit. It was a great listen.

[BarclaySouthway]

Some of you long-time Oriole fans might remember a game in 1978, in which the Orioles were losing to the Yankees at Memorial Stadium ......... BUT ........ the Yankees had scored 5 runs in the top half of the 7th inning to take the lead, and because of the fact that the Orioles were unable to complete their at-bats in the bottom half of the inning (due to heavy rains which continued until the field was unplayable to resume the game), the rule pushed the results of the game back to the most recently-completed inning, which was before the Yankees' offensive outburst, which subsequently awarded the Orioles the victory (Rule 4.12).

I was at that game. Oh man was that great! I seem to remember the grounds crew making a lake in left field when they removed the tarp. When they called it, the 5 on the Yankees' inning line flashed for a couple of seconds and disappeared and the crowd went wild! Good times.

[scOtt]

Now ....... it could have been worse. One of these teams could have had an 8-1 lead after 4 innings, and the rains could have come then, sparking what would be an outrageous injustice. Dave (the former pitcher) Johnson spoke of the ridiculous nature of this rule last year, while one of the Orioles' games was in a rain delay. Not only is the rule blatantly unfair to the team that is winning the game (especially if they are winning by a lot), but it also can encourage a team to intentionally make outs as quickly as possible. For example, if the rains start getting harder in the 3rd or 4th inning....

That game isn't the perfect example, but consider this....

The weather looked terrible that night, and we were all expecting it to end early (be erased). Thing is... it cleared up eventually and the game was finished.

Now you're talking about the Yanks giving up several intentional outs, to hasten the 5th inning. While we complain and argue multiple-page threads about giving up ONE out on a sac bunt. A 7 run lead is a little excessive, but what if it's 5? Or 4?

The rule is fair (enough) because it's a dangerous strategy to give up multiple outs.

[OFFNY]

That game isn't the perfect example, but consider this....

The weather looked terrible that night, and we were all expecting it to end early (be erased). Thing is... it cleared up eventually and the game was finished.

Now you're talking about the Yanks giving up several intentional outs, to hasten the 5th inning. While we complain and argue multiple-page threads about giving up ONE out on a sac bunt. A 7 run lead is a little excessive, but what if it's 5? Or 4?

The rule is fair (enough) because it's a dangerous strategy to give up multiple outs.

That is hardly the point, though. It's an insane rule. The intentional out strategy to hasten the game is one minor consideration (among many) regarding a rule that should have never been implemented in the first place.

.

[Owen21]

I was at that game. Oh man was that great! I seem to remember the grounds crew making a lake in left field when they removed the tarp. When they called it, the 5 on the Yankees' inning line flashed for a couple of seconds and disappeared and the crowd went wild! Good times.

That must have been awesome to be there ! With the flashing 5...then disappearing, I think it was Brooks letting the Yanks know that just because he is gone, the Orioles are not !