The No-Hitter That Wasn't

In 1990, the Yankees' Andy Hawkins threw a no-hitter against the White Sox but lost the game 4-0.  In 1995, Pedro Martinez took a perfect game into the 10th, only to lose it on a leadoff single.  Perhaps most famously, in 1959, Harvey Haddix threw 12 perfect innings in a game his team eventually lost in 13.  None of those officially count as no-hitters in the Major League record book.  And neither does the no-hitter Madison Bumgarner tossed on Sunday in Atlanta.

That's because Bumgarner's no-no came in the second game of a doubleheader, and doubleheaders this season, just like last season, are seven-inning games.  And, since MLB rules state: "An official no-hit game occurs when a pitcher (or pitchers) allows no hits during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings."  So, because MLB changed the rules last season, Bumgarner's no-hitter doesn't count.

For the record, I completely agree with the rule as it applies to Hawkins, Martinez and Haddix.  The Yankees were the road team, so Hawkins didn't have to pitch a bottom of the ninth.  Martinez and Haddix, meanwhile, both eventually gave up a hit, even though it was in extra innings.  Beyond that, Hawkins and Haddix both took the loss, and Martinez didn't even throw a complete game (Mel Rojas came in for him right after he gave up the hit)!

I have absolutely no problem with MLB's definition of a no-hitter, either.  In fact, I'd add a provision that it must be a complete game shutout, because you can give up a run, potentially lose the game, and still have it count as a no-hitter, which I think is incredibly dumb.  However, it's also incredibly dumb that Bumgarner won't officially get credit for throwing a no-hitter.  Because he met every other provision of the rule.

According to MLB's definition, it's not possible for a pitcher to throw a no-hitter in a doubleheader this season because he won't pitch nine innings, even though the regulation length of that game is seven innings.  That's absurd!  It's not the pitcher's fault MLB decided doubleheaders would be two seven-inning games instead of two nine-inning games!

They were discussing this during the Yankee game tonight, and Michael Kay made another good point about how the 2020 rule changes impact no-hitters.  While the doubleheader rule makes it impossible to throw a no-hitter, the extra inning rule also makes it possible to throw a perfect game and lose!  Because of the free runner at second, a pitcher could theoretically allow a run while still not having anybody reach base.  Which is equally ridiculous!

When they decided on these rule changes last season, no-hitters were probably the furthest thing from their minds.  Yet they almost had to deal with it last year when Ian Anderson took a no-no into the seventh of a seven-inning game against the Yankees, and now they really do have to deal with it.  Because it's a technicality.  That's the only thing keeping this no-hitter from being official. 

Some people actually like the seven-inning doubleheaders, but the vast majority of baseball fans do not.  For any number of reasons.  But, if you were on the fence and you needed one, this is it.  (As you know, I also hate the extra-inning rule, but that's a rant for another day.)

This has a very 1961 feeling about it.  That was the first year of the 162-game schedule in the American League, and Commissioner Ford Frick decided that if Roger Maris and/or Mickey Mantle were to break Babe Ruth's single-season home run record, they'd have to do it in 154 games (the same number that teams played in 1927) for it to be official.  Maris didn't break the record until the Yankees' 162nd game, so the record had an asterisk next to it for 30 years until MLB finally removed it in the early 90s.

Back then, most people agreed that it was ridiculous Maris had an asterisk applied to his record.  He played the number of games on the schedule.  It wasn't his fault that there were more of them.  Likewise, it's not Bumgarner's fault that Sunday's game was only scheduled for seven innings.  And he shouldn't have his achievement taken away because of that.

Especially if MLB moves to make seven-inning doubleheaders permanent (which I hope never happens), they need to reconsider the wording of the rule.  That would actually be pretty simple, too.  All you do is take out "which consists of at least nine innings" and change it to "over the scheduled number of regulation innings." 

There's no reason why they can't change that definition immediately, either.  After all, seven-inning doubleheaders weren't even a thing until a week into last season.  They also adjusted the roster size in the middle of the season last year.  So, if they can change rules on the fly, there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to adjust their interpretations of those rules, too.  And they should start with giving MadBum his no-no.

Those who argued why it shouldn't count as an official no-hitter (including some pitchers who've thrown no-hitters themselves) used the eighth and ninth innings as part of their reasoning.  In their opinion, it's harder to get those final six outs, especially with the pressure of a no-hitter mounting, so throwing one over seven innings can't compare.  I'm not going to argue with that reasoning.  There have been a number of pitchers who've lost no-hitters in the eighth or ninth over the years.  BUT...those games weren't scheduled to end after seven innings.  That's the difference.

Bumgarner did what was required of him.  He threw a complete game and didn't allow any hits.  The fact that the game was scheduled for seven innings should be irrelevant.  Maybe he would've lost it in the eighth or ninth.  We'll never know.  Because there wasn't gonna be an eighth or ninth (and if there was, they would've started with the stupid runner on second base anyway)!

If MLB wants to have seven-inning games and treat them the same as if they were nine, then the same rules have to apply.  It also makes very little sense that seven-inning games can still be considered shutouts or one-hitters, but not no-hitters.  If the pitcher goes all seven, he still gets credit for a complete game.  How come?  Under the same interpretation they use for no-hitters, shouldn't he have to go nine for it to count as a complete game?

Or, I have a better solution to the problem.  Get rid of the seven-inning games!  Either that or count seven-inning no-hitters!  Because Madison Bumgarner threw one on Sunday.  Even if he technically didn't.