GIDP with a man on 3rd and no outs

[JoshHamilton]

Vlad just did this, with Young scoring while Hamilton was out at 2nd.

I guess I've never really paid attention, but why didn't Vlad get an RBI? If a guy is on third and you ground out whiLe he scores, you're credited with an RBI. Why is it different in a double play situation?

 

[Jurgy25]

If you hit into a double play, you are not awarded with a rbi. Not sure why, but those are the rules.

 

[matfanofold]

Perhaps if an out is registered before the run crosses the plate?

 

[JoshHamilton]

Hmm, learn something new every day

 

[stu]

You don't get rewarded for causing two outs.

 

[JoshHamilton]

Perhaps if an out is registered before the run crosses the plate?

That was my guess. Much like in a non force situation if a runner crosses home before another player is tagged out, the run scores

 

[pgwtamu]

it may have something to do with a fielders choice or something.....he wasn't the first one out, hamilton was, and it was a fielders choice to make the double play and not try to get young out....just a thought....

 

[hail2thevictors]

You don't get rewarded for causing two outs.

To put it plain and simple, this ^^^

 

[All The Hype]

You don't get rewarded for causing two outs.

To put it plain and simple, this ^^^

This is true, although it's not a rule with which I personally agree.

I believe that if you get a runner home by "batting" the ball, you should be credited with an RBI no matter what.

Think about it, the object of the game is to score runs, not to not make outs. So if a batter can get a run across, even if it means taking two outs, why penalize him? He got the job done and deserves the credit for doing so.

 

[Joshua.Roundtree]

You don't get rewarded for causing two outs.

To put it plain and simple, this ^^^

This is true, although it's not a rule with which I personally agree.

I believe that if you get a runner home by "batting" the ball, you should be credited with an RBI no matter what.

Think about it, the object of the game is to score runs, not to not make outs. So if a batter can get a run across, even if it means taking two outs, why penalize him? He got the job done and deserves the credit for doing so.

Assuming there are no outs and runners on first and third and batter GIDP. He scores the run from third and leaves his team with no one on and two outs. 90% of teams would give up that run for two outs (depending on score and situation obviously). Taking two outs for that run is a win for the defense because that run was going to score 70% of the time anyways and eliminates the chance for a big inning. The batter didn't help his team and is therefore not rewarded.

 

[All The Hype]

[quote="ALL_THE_HYPE":38ffg9bn]

You don't get rewarded for causing two outs.

To put it plain and simple, this ^^^

This is true, although it's not a rule with which I personally agree.

I believe that if you get a runner home by "batting" the ball, you should be credited with an RBI no matter what.

Think about it, the object of the game is to score runs, not to not make outs. So if a batter can get a run across, even if it means taking two outs, why penalize him? He got the job done and deserves the credit for doing so.

Assuming there are no outs and runners on first and third and batter GIDP. He scores the run from third and leaves his team with no one on and two outs. 90% of teams would give up that run for two outs (depending on score and situation obviously). Taking two outs for that run is a win for the defense because that run was going to score 70% of the time anyways and eliminates the chance for a big inning. The batter didn't help his team and is therefore not rewarded.[/quote:38ffg9bn]


How is getting a run in not helping his team?

Yes, it depends on inning and score, but still, the object of the game is to score runs and that's what the batter made happen. 70% is not 100%...it's not a sure thing that he would score.

 

[pigskincardboard]

Never thought of this, but it makes me wonder what a SAC FLY + DOUBLE UP would result in.

 

[rum151man]

simple-the defense wants the 2 outs more than giving up the run, so the defense wins and yes its ruled a fielders coice no rbi. if a runner scores on a sac fly and another runner is thrown out at another base the player still gets and rbi and the 2nd out is also a fielders choice but its on the other runner cause its not a force out.

 

[rum151man]

heres a question for you guys is a batter credited with a sac fly if there is already 1 out and no runner scores???

 

[cmnkb8]

heres a question for you guys is a batter credited with a sac fly if there is already 1 out and no runner scores???

No, a sac fly is only awarded if the run scores on the out.

 

[rsmath]

Never thought of this, but it makes me wonder what a SAC FLY + DOUBLE UP would result in.

Apparently RBI.

It happened in the Isotopes game the other night and the batter got credited with an RBI for the Sac Fly. I wasn't at that game so I didn't specifically get to see if the run crossed the plate before the baserunner was doubled up, but I could go look at the game video in the MilB.tv archives.

 

[Mighty Bombjack]

Never thought of this, but it makes me wonder what a SAC FLY + DOUBLE UP would result in.

Apparently RBI.

It happened in the Isotopes game the other night and the batter got credited with an RBI for the Sac Fly. I wasn't at that game so I didn't specifically get to see if the run crossed the plate before the baserunner was doubled up, but I could go look at the game video in the MilB.tv archives.

Yeah, this is a successful SF with the second out a Caught Stealing.

I love scoring games and, consequently, posts like this one.