Rob Neyer writes on the Mets trying to appeal the ruling by the official scorer on the one hit against R.A. Dickey on Wednesday. The Mets want it changed to an error:
But that wasn’t an error, and an appeal would look awfully greedy. Because that first Mets no-hitter a couple of weeks ago? It shouldn’t have been a no-hitter, because Carlos Beltran‘s foul ball shouldn’t have been a foul ball.
Be careful, Mets. Lest you anger the Baseball Gods.
Dickey pitched a spectacular game. That should be enough.
I don’t think the two cases are the same: the Beltran foul ball was an umpire’s decision. The Upton hit was a scorer’s decision.
But I agree that the Mets need to just let it be. That play is consistently called a hit. You can’t assume 3B can make that play.
I’m a mets fan and I don’t think it should be changed, but it’s a pretty shoddy analogy. One is a blown call on the field, which is standard. The other is a bad decision by a scorer. The difference between the two is that umps inherently have an affect on the game while scorers are third party observers. In theory, scoring does not need to be done until after the game ends, while umpiring must be done for the game to occur.