Jump to content
  • 0

Extra innings.


MT73
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 1078 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Question

22 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

I found surprisingly little about the tie breaker rules online. But here’s something I found at the nbcsports website (written by Jon Heyman, I think)--

The runner-on-second rule has been in place in the minor leagues for the past two seasons. Under the minor league rule the runner at second base will be the player in the batting order position previous to the leadoff batter of the extra inning. So, usually, the guy who made the last out in the previous inning or a pinch runner for that guy. If the placed runner scored, it’s considered an unearned run.

The rule was pioneered in the World Baseball Classic and was tested in the Gulf Coast League and Arizona League before 2018, when all minor leagues adopted it. In 2017 Rob Manfred said he doubted the rule would ever be used in the majors, but I don’t suppose anyone could’ve anticipated what baseball in 2020 would look like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, Senor Azul said:

Under the minor league rule the runner at second base will be the player in the batting order position previous to the leadoff batter of the extra inning. So, usually, the guy who made the last out in the previous inning or a pinch runner for that guy.

Holy crap that is convoluted! Now I get where the confusion comes from!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
3 hours ago, MT73 said:

I am confused.

MLB 

Batter # 7 made last out for visiting team.

‘Game tied.

Which runner is placed on 2nd base and who bats in top 10th?

 

If batter #8 is the batter that would normally lead off the 10th for his team. Batter #7 would be placed on 2nd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Paralleling @Matt , but rephrasing it– 

Whoever is due at bat (or still at bat), the batter in the lineup immediately before him is placed at 2B. 

Can the runner placed at 2B be substituted (pinch-run) for? Yes, treated like any other substitution. Can the batter be substituted (pinch-hit) for? Yes, treated like any other substitution. 

Thus, in a lineup of: 

  1. Adams
  2. Baker
  3. Cleary
  4. Dawson
  5. Ebbets
  6. Fairchild
  7. Gibbs
  8. Hernandez
  9. Iassogna

Situation A: If Ebbets flies out to F9 for the final out in their half of the 9th inning, then Fairchild would be due up (and lead off) the 10th inning, and Ebbets would be placed at 2B. 

If Manager wanted to sub Jordan for Ebbets, he could. Jordan would replace Ebbets in the game as any other substitution. If Manager wanted to sub Kowalski for Fairchild, he could. Kowalski would replace Fairchild in the game as any other substitution. 

Situation B: If Iassogna and Adams are aboard, with 2 outs in the 9th inning, and Cleary hits into a force play wherein Adams is retired for the third out at 2B, Dawson is due up in the 10th inning, and Cleary is placed at 2B. 

This addresses and defeats the “But Adams made the last out” argument. 

Situation C: If Fairchild is aboard with 2 outs in the 9th, and Hernandez batting, Fairchild gets picked off or caught stealing, making the third out. Hernandez would still be at-bat in the 10th inning, but Gibbs would be placed at 2B.

This addresses and defeats the “But Fairchild made the last out” argument, because Hernandez did not complete his at-bat. 

Again, if Manager wanted to pinch-run Lopez for Gibbs, he could. If he wanted to pinch-hit Moore for Hernandez, he could; it would be handled like any other substitution. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

If MLB's goal is to increase pace of play and decide extra innings games as quickly as possible...

They need to allow managers to insert ANYONE on the game lineup as a runner on 2B to start the inning in extra innings and game lineups should be increased by one player to allow teams to keep an extra innings speedster on the roster.

~Dawg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
9 hours ago, MT73 said:

I read somewhere that, no matter what, #9 is placed on second and the top of the order comes up.

‘I guess that is wrong.

Please don’t take this as me being harsh to you, @MT73, but where was this you read? Who stated that

We’ve seen confusion (rightly so) about this, but it typically seems to be sports journalists trying to explain it. 

I think the guys who have been working with it for two years now (ahem) are going to be a more accurate source than reading about it online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I reread the original article and realized that I was mistaken.

‘The author was writing what he thought the rule should be tweaked to allow the lineup to be reset rather than what it actually is.

‘My bad:

 

 

 

0E53423F-2951-4D6F-B51A-F014D67014EF.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I guess none of you have ever been exposed to softball.  Softball has done this tie breaker format, including NCAA and Olympics, for many many years.   Unfortunately for me, one of the teams I coached lost the National Championship in this format.

On 4/2/2021 at 2:30 PM, SeeingEyeDog said:

If MLB's goal is to increase pace of play and decide extra innings games as quickly as possible...

They need to allow managers to insert ANYONE on the game lineup as a runner on 2B to start the inning in extra innings and game lineups should be increased by one player to allow teams to keep an extra innings speedster on the roster.

First...they can put ANYONE in they want...it's called a substitution.

But, if every team was just allowed an extra roster spot to have a designated speedster, how does that resolve the game faster...both teams get a crack at it in each inning...you're just inviting a scenario where both teams score one run and then go to the 11th inning.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

No, they can't put anyone in that they want. If they could, they would be doing that. The rules do not provide for unrestricted substitutions. Perhaps for extra innings, they should. There are many ways a runner can advance from second and eventually get home and score. Starting the extra innings with a runner at second who can run fast helps increase the likelihood they will score.

Look, I was fine with the game the way it was. The point I was really trying to make was...Clearly, MLB is not as concerned with ending games in extra innings as quickly as they can because there are additional measures they can take to end the game that they aren't taking.

~Dawg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

There's still one part of the rule we don't know for certain, because 2020 had a universal DH. Is the "preceding batter is the pitcher" clause actually in play?

There were two instances in 2020 in which a team had forfeited the DH and the pitcher was in that spot, but in neither case did the batter preceding that pitcher take his spot on second base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
9 hours ago, bwburke94 said:

There's still one part of the rule we don't know for certain, because 2020 had a universal DH. Is the "preceding batter is the pitcher" clause actually in play?

There were two instances in 2020 in which a team had forfeited the DH and the pitcher was in that spot, but in neither case did the batter preceding that pitcher take his spot on second base.

Stop. 🛑 

You’re over-complicating this. 

The presence of a “universal DH” or a pitcher batting (straight 9) doesn’t matter and is irrelevant. 

The batter who is up or due up in the lineup is at bat. The batter – whoever it is, DH, P, C, EH or otherwise – immediately before him in that lineup is placed at 2B. Simple! 

Now, if this same rule is being used in tournament games (which it frequently is, BTW), and there is an allowance for Courtesy Runners for Catcher (and/or Pitcher), then an eligible courtesy runner can be placed at 2B if the F2 (C) or F1 (P) is the guy in the lineup who would be placed at 2B normally. If the DH happens to be the one who’d be placed at 2B, then the manager/coach is perfectly able to end the DH, and have the player being covered by the DH run; or, he can make legal substitution (pinch-run) if he wishes. All of these options are available. 

A major part of getting this rule right is game – or more accurately, lineup – management. 

Again, it’s a better, more accurate answer coming from the guys (umpires) that have been working with this rule for the past few years than reading about it from... speculative sources. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 4/3/2021 at 5:47 PM, SeeingEyeDog said:

No, they can't put anyone in that they want. If they could, they would be doing that. The rules do not provide for unrestricted substitutions. Perhaps for extra innings, they should. There are many ways a runner can advance from second and eventually get home and score. Starting the extra innings with a runner at second who can run fast helps increase the likelihood they will score.

Semantics...ANYONE left remaining on the lineup.  

Yes, starting extra innings with a runner at second who can run fast helps them score...not sure how that ends the game faster.  If each team can put ANYONE they wanted at second (presumably the same person every extra inning), then visiting team scores with their very fast runner...home team scores their very fast runner...rinse repeat.  Your proposal would help ensure the game lasts longer, because you're increasing the likelihood that both teams score R2 in their respective inning halves.  

On 4/3/2021 at 5:47 PM, SeeingEyeDog said:

Clearly, MLB is not as concerned with ending games in extra innings as quickly as they can because there are additional measures they can take to end the game that they aren't taking.

The 2nd base tiebreaker rule, as is, DOES end games faster...this was demonstrated in the minors in the test run, and has been demonstrated in softball for years...and though a small sample, in 2020 MLB as well....as well, on opening day 2021 all four extra inning games ended in the 10th.    Going by the minor league stats the past few years we've gone from roughly 50% to 75% of games ended in 10th inning - just by adding the runner to second base....and increased from roughly 80% to 95% of games ended by the 11th inning.   Games going beyond three extra innings were cut by almost 90%.  The rule is doing exactly what they want.

Not sure what additional measures you would want...if the visiting teams scores they win, if they don't they lose?

The only thing I would add to the current format is limit it to three innings...if it's still tied after 12, end it a tie...the ultimate goal here is saving pitcher arms....and based on the minor league results the last few years, that would be about 1 in 200 extra inning games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

It turns out that Mr. bwburke94 is right. There was an exception to the 2020 extra-inning rule about who can be placed at second base to start the extra inning. I found three sources online that corroborates him (two of them being press releases from MLB). He is also right about it being unclear at the moment if that exception is still there in the 2021 rules. Good memory, Mr. bwburke94!

 

MLB press release June 29, 2020

An extra-innings rule will begin each extra inning with a runner on second base.

The batter (or a substitute for the batter) who leads off an inning shall continue to be the batter who would lead off the inning in the absence of this extra-innings rule.

The runner placed on second base at the start of each half-inning shall be the player (or a substitute for such player) in the batting order immediately preceding that half-inning’s leadoff hitter. By way of example, if the number five hitter in the batting order is due to lead off the tenth inning, the number four player in the batting order (or a pinchrunner for such player) shall begin the inning on second base.  However, if the player in the batting order immediately preceding that half-inning’s leadoff hitter is the pitcher, the runner placed on second base at the start of that half-inning may be the player preceding the pitcher in the batting order. Any runner or batter removed from the game for a substitute shall be ineligible to return to the game, as is the case in all circumstances under the OBR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 4/2/2021 at 5:12 PM, MT73 said:

I reread the original article and realized that I was mistaken.

‘The author was writing what he thought the rule should be tweaked to allow the lineup to be reset rather than what it actually is.

‘My bad:

 

 

 

0E53423F-2951-4D6F-B51A-F014D67014EF.png

I wonder if this author really understands these sports.

Baseball is different from NFL, NHL and NBA.  They have periods/halves/quarters that inherently reset things, baseball doesn't.  They allow for subs in and out...baseball doesn't.   You can't reset baseball...it's not like you can put your starting pitcher back in to start the tenth.

The randomness of the lineup is what is required to ensure the games end more quickly.  If the lineup resets to the top of the order you increase the likelihood that both teams score in each extra inning.  Not to mention a weird disparity where some players gets 7 or 8 at bats where others get three or four, if it were to go three or more extra innings.

Knowing both teams are always coming to 1, 2 and 3 will change things very little strategically.  The randomness, though, should influence how a coach plays the ninth...knowing if the other team (or yours) is coming to 1, 2 and 3 or 6, 7, and 8, should cause a coach to take a bit of a risk to win now, or settle for a tie and take his chances in the tenth.   That's the theory...though it hasn't played yet out in the NFL as cowardly coaches still forego the "risky" going for two when down by one in the last minute and take the "safe" single and play for OT...when in fact kicking the single is more likely to lose the game.

It's a novel idea, and may appeal to the warriors' sensibility of the best beating the best, but it does not serve to achieve the main goal of the tiebreaker rule...which is to break the tie sooner, not later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 4/5/2021 at 11:43 AM, Senor Azul said:

However, if the player in the batting order immediately preceding that half-inning’s leadoff hitter is the pitcher, the runner placed on second base at the start of that half-inning may be the player preceding the pitcher in the batting order.

did anyone take note that in the NL this rule can be gamed by doing a double switch?  NY Mets took advantage of it the other day and were able to get Lindor on 2nd to start and he scored on a single to tie the game up.

https://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/mets-phillies-doubleheader-jonathan-villar-walk-off-1.50213928

the video doesn't have the Mets booth lambasting the rule and suggesting it will need to be changed.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
45 minutes ago, stkjock said:

did anyone take note that in the NL this rule can be gamed by doing a double switch?  NY Mets took advantage of it the other day and were able to get Lindor on 2nd to start and he scored on a single to tie the game up.

https://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/mets-phillies-doubleheader-jonathan-villar-walk-off-1.50213928

the video doesn't have the Mets booth lambasting the rule and suggesting it will need to be changed.

 

 

 

It’s behind a paywall so I’m assuming they did the double switch on offense. Interesting that with a DH you can’t move the pitcher on offense but there is no restriction on this “projected” double switch with a straight nine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
19 hours ago, Jimurray said:

It’s behind a paywall so I’m assuming they did the double switch on offense. Interesting that with a DH you can’t move the pitcher on offense but there is no restriction on this “projected” double switch with a straight nine. 

sorry about that, I thought I had included a second link as well that had no paywall. 

 

https://www.mlb.com/news/mets-earn-walk-off-win-over-phillies-in-game-1

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 4/3/2021 at 6:47 PM, SeeingEyeDog said:

Clearly, MLB is not as concerned with ending games in extra innings as quickly as they can because there are additional measures they can take to end the game that they aren't taking.

I don't think you can draw that conclusion.

When something is the result of negotiation, as this rule would have been, the end result is something that is acceptable to all involved but it is unlikely to be exactly what any one of them wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 4/15/2021 at 10:54 AM, stkjock said:

sorry about that, I thought I had included a second link as well that had no paywall. 

 

https://www.mlb.com/news/mets-earn-walk-off-win-over-phillies-in-game-1

 

 

Checking the bos score it shows that they made the double switch on defense so they were thinking ahead. I wonder if they didn't and waited until on offense whether telling the PU that they are subbing a new pitcher for the guy that made the last out would be accepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...