April 12, 20232 yr I agree with many on this board about the extra inning ghost runner rule. I hate it as well. Here is what I would do in a situation much like last night in the bottom of the tenth. Walk the first batter so there are runners on first and second base. Why? Well, if one run wins the game, the guy on first doesn't matter and it sets up a possible double play...and, if there needs to be a play at third base, it becomes a force play and not a tag play. Also, the walk to the first batter can be unintentional to maybe get the batter to swing at bad pitches and get himself out.
April 12, 20232 yr I think some teams have done this. I believe the Sox once had an opponent intentionally walk a batter after the Sox sacrificed the ghost runner to 3rd. And in typical White Sox fashion, they rolled into a double play. They eventually lost the game, of course.
April 12, 20232 yr 32 minutes ago, Tomtom said: I agree with many on this board about the extra inning ghost runner rule. I hate it as well. Here is what I would do in a situation much like last night in the bottom of the tenth. Walk the first batter so there are runners on first and second base. Why? Well, if one run wins the game, the guy on first doesn't matter and it sets up a possible double play...and, if there needs to be a play at third base, it becomes a force play and not a tag play. Also, the walk to the first batter can be unintentional to maybe get the batter to swing at bad pitches and get himself out. The White Sox only intentionally walk players when they are in a 1-2 count.
April 12, 20232 yr 45 minutes ago, Tomtom said: Walk the first batter so there are runners on first and second base. Then the pitcher unintentionally walks the next batter and you have bases loaded 0 outs. Maybe with a groundball pitcher it could be worth the risk.
April 12, 20232 yr I agree with the premise in your post and some of the responses. I think your ability to walk the first batter to set up the double play is dependent on your confidence the pitcher will throw strikes and or get a ground ball (while not allowing a passed ball). Also if the opposition has first and second with no outs, are they more likely to bunt which brings your confidence in your defense making the play and or not throwing balls into the outfield/catching them etc etc. Baseball can be great because while it seems simple it can be as complex as you want.
April 12, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, Tomtom said: I agree with many on this board about the extra inning ghost runner rule. I hate it as well. Here is what I would do in a situation much like last night in the bottom of the tenth. Walk the first batter so there are runners on first and second base. Why? Well, if one run wins the game, the guy on first doesn't matter and it sets up a possible double play...and, if there needs to be a play at third base, it becomes a force play and not a tag play. Also, the walk to the first batter can be unintentional to maybe get the batter to swing at bad pitches and get himself out. You know another aspect of the this BS extra innings rule is if the fact when the runner on second scores to win the game, even it's it not by an error, the scoring run is an earned run charged to that pitcher. The pitcher didn't even put the runner on. Why should he take a loss and receive an earned run to his record? In a normal 9 inning game if a reliever comes in with a man on second he inherited, and allows the winning run in the bottom of the 9th, he does not receive the credit for the earned run. To your point I do agree walking the first batter makes sense. Of course it is risky for the Sox vs the good fielding teams because our infield defense right now sucks!
April 12, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, The Kids Can Play said: You know another aspect of the this BS extra innings rule is if the fact when the runner on second scores to win the game, even it's it not by an error, the scoring run is an earned run charged to that pitcher. The pitcher didn't even put the runner on. Why should he take a loss and receive an earned run to his record? In a normal 9 inning game if a reliever comes in with a man on second he inherited, and allows the winning run in the bottom of the 9th, he does not receive the credit for the earned run. To your point I do agree walking the first batter makes sense. Of course it is risky for the Sox vs the good fielding teams because our infield defense right now sucks! I am 95% sure that the ghost runner scoring is always charged as an unearned run to the pitcher starting the inning.
April 12, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, The Kids Can Play said: You know another aspect of the this BS extra innings rule is if the fact when the runner on second scores to win the game, even it's it not by an error, the scoring run is an earned run charged to that pitcher. The pitcher didn't even put the runner on. Why should he take a loss and receive an earned run to his record? In a normal 9 inning game if a reliever comes in with a man on second he inherited, and allows the winning run in the bottom of the 9th, he does not receive the credit for the earned run. To your point I do agree walking the first batter makes sense. Of course it is risky for the Sox vs the good fielding teams because our infield defense right now sucks! It’s an unearned run.
April 12, 20232 yr 9 minutes ago, The Kids Can Play said: You know another aspect of the this BS extra innings rule is if the fact when the runner on second scores to win the game, even it's it not by an error, the scoring run is an earned run charged to that pitcher. The pitcher didn't even put the runner on. Why should he take a loss and receive an earned run to his record? In a normal 9 inning game if a reliever comes in with a man on second he inherited, and allows the winning run in the bottom of the 9th, he does not receive the credit for the earned run. To your point I do agree walking the first batter makes sense. Of course it is risky for the Sox vs the good fielding teams because our infield defense right now sucks! Ok my bad.
April 12, 20232 yr I'm all in on ties. I actually don't mind the rule. Hell, it's been all downhill once they started counting fouls as strikes and only four balls for a walk. Damn changes to the game.
April 12, 20232 yr Not gonna lie - in 2020 I was hoping for a walk-off 2-run home run to lead off the bottom of the 8th inning. Now I'd settle for that in the 10th. I'm pretty "meh" on the extra innings runner rule. I could see an argument to be made for waiting until the 12th inning to do it, for example, but overall, "meh."
April 12, 20232 yr Let's go back to play until one team scores 21 runs. Those games only lasted six innings or so. Damn younglings ruining the game. They don't even wear a nice tie and fedora to games and tell me to put out my cigarette. Let's end this with a home run derby shootout. Three batters, five swings each.
April 12, 20232 yr Hey, if you're going to be stupid about extra-inning games, at least be NHL-stupid and give the losing team 1/2 a win or something! Don't let hockey be the only sport that rewards a losing team!!
April 12, 20232 yr It's just sad we will never again have the thrill of Baines walking off a home run in the bottom of the 25th... Edited April 12, 20232 yr by SpringfieldFan
April 13, 20232 yr On 4/12/2023 at 10:18 AM, Tomtom said: I agree with many on this board about the extra inning ghost runner rule. I hate it as well. Here is what I would do in a situation much like last night in the bottom of the tenth. Walk the first batter so there are runners on first and second base. Why? Well, if one run wins the game, the guy on first doesn't matter and it sets up a possible double play...and, if there needs to be a play at third base, it becomes a force play and not a tag play. Also, the walk to the first batter can be unintentional to maybe get the batter to swing at bad pitches and get himself out. I agree with this in a lot of situations, but not the one the Sox were in on Tuesday. Doesn't make sense to intentionally walk the #9 hitter to bring up the leadoff hitter. If the Sox hadn't thrown the ball away, and Taylor just ended up with a sac bunt so the Twins had a runner on 3rd with one out, then I think you would consider walking both Solano and Buxton to load the bases and pitch to Larnach with a double play as a possibility. Edited April 13, 20232 yr by lpneck
April 13, 20232 yr When I watch other games its like "damn this is so easy to score a run this is stupid" then I watch the white sox try to score runs with a man starting at second and fail and I'm like "wow this must be like psyching out our hitters this is unfair they should start with bases loaded"
April 13, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, bmags said: When I watch other games its like "damn this is so easy to score a run this is stupid" then I watch the white sox try to score runs with a man starting at second and fail and I'm like "wow this must be like psyching out our hitters this is unfair they should start with bases loaded" They might actually do worse.
April 13, 20232 yr On 4/12/2023 at 9:18 AM, Tomtom said: I agree with many on this board about the extra inning ghost runner rule. I hate it as well. Here is what I would do in a situation much like last night in the bottom of the tenth. Walk the first batter so there are runners on first and second base. Why? Well, if one run wins the game, the guy on first doesn't matter and it sets up a possible double play...and, if there needs to be a play at third base, it becomes a force play and not a tag play. Also, the walk to the first batter can be unintentional to maybe get the batter to swing at bad pitches and get himself out. well if you're the home team, you wouldn't walk the first batter because obvious they could put up a crooked number before your first AB.. obviously as the away team you could use this strategy, especially if you're up after the top half of the inning. makes no sense why the away team wouldnt do this. which means the Sox won't do it.
April 13, 20232 yr 0 runs happens slightly more often with a runner on 2nd and 0 outs than with runners on 1st and 2nd with 0 outs (37.91% vs. 36.33%), so while it's technically the wrong move, it's not a catastrophically wrong move, and may be situationally advantageous. Of course, whichever way the White Sox do it will yield the wrong results.
April 14, 20232 yr On 4/12/2023 at 12:51 PM, SpringfieldFan said: Stupid rule. I would rather they just let the games end in a tie. I totally agree. It works fine for football and hockey.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.