...kinda confusing

[yankeesince59]

...I guess the 5 inning rule does not apply to relievers?

http://espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs/201...ves-jeremy-affeldt-win-madison-bumgarner-save

...but a starter has to be ahead after 5 innings to get the win.

...So if the Giants had taken the lead in the top of the 3rd instead of the top of the 4th, a reliever could have come in for Hudson and recorded only 1 out, he would have been credited with the win?



...again, kinda confusing. I was not aware of this rule.

 

[Rick2583]

...I guess the 5 inning rule does not apply to relievers?

http://espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs/201...ves-jeremy-affeldt-win-madison-bumgarner-save

...but a starter has to be ahead after 5 innings to get the win.

...So if the Giants had taken the lead in the top of the 3rd instead of the top of the 4th, a reliever could have come in for Hudson and recorded only 1 out, he would have been credited with the win?



...again, kinda confusing. I was not aware of this rule.

You're not alone.

 

[blgridesagain]

Ive seen it done before. Regular season.
And under those circumstances (lHudson/Bumgarner),
Bumgarner was clearly The winning pitcher.

 

[Rick2583]

Ive seen it done before. Regular season.
And under those circumstances (lHudson/Bumgarner),
Bumgarner was clearly The winning pitcher.

This rule makes absolutely no sense.

 

[blgridesagain]

This rule makes absolutely no sense.

________________

Rick, if it was between Hudson and Bumgarner...who should be the "winning" pitcher?

My opinion....as long as Hudson wasn't the winning pitcher, they did good.

 

[Rick2583]

________________

Rick, if it was between Hudson and Bumgarner...who should be the "winning" pitcher?

My opinion....as long as Hudson wasn't the winning pitcher, they did good.

No pitcher went into or completed the 5th inning so Bumgarner should have been the winner. Like they do during the reg season.

 

[blgridesagain]

No pitcher went into or completed the 5th inning so Bumgarner should have been the winner. Like they do during the reg season.

_______________________________

Agree - big time!

 

[Mattingly23NY]

(scratching my head)....Some things just don't make sense....

 

[Rick2583]

I'm sure Bumgarner doesn't care one way or another but he definitely should have gotten that win.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

affeldt was the pitcher when the giants took the lead. i believe that is the rule, unless that pitcher pitches poorly enough for the official scorer to give it to someone else

 

[Rick2583]

affeldt was the pitcher when the giants took the lead. i believe that is the rule, unless that pitcher pitches poorly enough for the official scorer to give it to someone else

But that's not the way it works during the regular season.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

pretty good breakdown of it here

http://deadspin.com/why-did-madison-bumgarner-get-the-save-and-not-the-win-1652858585

 

[Rick2583]

pretty good breakdown of it here

http://deadspin.com/why-did-madison-bumgarner-get-the-save-and-not-the-win-1652858585

I've read the explanation to why it was awarded as it was earlier but what the OP & myself are stumped at is the fact that apparently the 5 inning rule only applies to the starter & not the reliever which is bullshit. (in our opinion.)

 

[yankeesince59]

...again, like I pointed out in the OP, while I read the explanation of the rule, it does not explain the reasoning behind the rule.

...also as I noted, using the language of the rule, theoretically a team could score 1 run in the top of the first and take the lead. In the bottom of the first inning their pitcher (pitcher A) injures himself after recording 2 outs and has to be removed. Pitcher B enters and records the final out of the first inning. Pitcher C comes in to start the bottom of the second inning and finishes the game with eight scoreless innings of relief. His team wins the game 1-0.

...so, going by "the rule"...pitcher B, who pitched 1/3 of an inning gets the win?...yeah, that makes sense.

 

[Mattingly23NY]

Baseballs rules are getting downright crazy, senseless. I do like some changes, like the automatic replay to determine if a borderline HR was over the fence. Instant Replay is nice, yet has actually increased the number of Mgr. ejections, (for disputing the replay), than ever before, approx 3 times more ejections.

I don't care for the Little Lg rule of not being able to block home plate. That belongs in LL, not MLB. Besides a Catcher should be at least able to straddle the plate, and not sit on it like Mike Sciosca made famous, and many others before him.

Actually it seems to me, MLB is degrading its sport, with some of the silliest insensible rules, yet took forever to implement PED suspensions. Next we shall see the fences moved in 100 feet, with the mound a paltry 45 feet away from Home Plate.

 

[BrianFromWA]

...again, like I pointed out in the OP, while I read the explanation of the rule, it does not explain the reasoning behind the rule.

...also as I noted, using the language of the rule, theoretically a team could score 1 run in the top of the first and take the lead. In the bottom of the first inning their pitcher (pitcher A) injures himself after recording 2 outs and has to be removed. Pitcher B enters and records the final out of the first inning. Pitcher C comes in to start the bottom of the second inning and finishes the game with eight scoreless innings of relief. His team wins the game 1-0.

...so, going by "the rule"...pitcher B, who pitched 1/3 of an inning gets the win?...yeah, that makes sense.

It's been a bit, but I've looked this up before...your "1/3 inning pitcher" wouldn't get the win.

If you start the game, you must go 5 to be eligible for the win. Once the starter is out, anyone who was on the mound for the last out before his team takes the final lead becomes the winner. If they have the lead already, then the official scorer gets to pick the winner.

In a game I was watching a couple of years ago, (must've been Mariners, but I don't recall many details) a pitcher was removed with 2 outs in an inning and a runner on first in a tie game...I think it was just to bring in a LOOGY for 1 batter. He never threw a pitch...picked off the runner before throwing a pitch to get out of the inning. Next at-bats, his team takes the lead. So the closer comes in to pitch the bottom of the inning. The guy who never threw a pitch got the win and the closer got the save.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Say a starting pitcher goes 4 inning, up 5-0, then leaves the game. A reliever comes in, gives up 7 runs in the top of the 5th, then his team scores 3 more to go up 8-7. Another pitcher comes in and goes the last 4 inning shutout ball. The last pitcher would get the win in this scenario

 

[yankeesince59]

It's been a bit, but I've looked this up before...your "1/3 inning pitcher" wouldn't get the win.

If you start the game, you must go 5 to be eligible for the win. Once the starter is out, anyone who was on the mound for the last out before his team takes the final lead becomes the winner. If they have the lead already, then the official scorer gets to pick the winner.
.

...again, I understand the rule. Like I said in post #14, " I read the explanation of the rule, it does not explain the reasoning behind the rule."

 

[yankeesince59]

Say a starting pitcher goes 4 inning, up 5-0, then leaves the game. A reliever comes in, gives up 7 runs in the top of the 5th, then his team scores 3 more to go up 8-7. Another pitcher comes in and goes the last 4 inning shutout ball. The last pitcher would get the win in this scenario

...how about a closer who comes in for the top of the 9th with a 2 run lead but blows the lead by giving up 3 runs...now down by a run, his team scores 2 runs in the bottom of the 9th...the closer blows the save, but gets the win.

 

[Mattingly23NY]

One of the great things about MLB, is History is being made every day of play. We see obvious Hall of Famers in the twilight of their careers, as well as in their prime.

i recall one year, when McGwire was playing 1st base, when he went to field a foul pop up just 5 feet out of bounds, the ball hit Mac on the head, as he lost it in the Sun. What do you think the call was? I didn't expect the call made on the field, still don't. Seemed to me, as all Umps converged to discuss the ruling, showing signs of bewilderment, the call was a not ruled a foul ball, but rather, the batter who ran to 1st and stood on the bag, was awarded a hit. WTF??

Makes me think of Canseco, when he played OF for the Rangers, and the ball hit him square on the head, and went over the fence, clearly a home run.....

 

[Rick2583]

...how about a closer who comes in for the top of the 9th with a 2 run lead but blows the lead by giving up 3 runs...now down by a run, his team scores 2 runs in the bottom of the 9th...the closer blows the save, but gets the win.

Yes which is an absolute joke.