I can imagine it. Perez could have thrown a no-hitter. Before he totally sucked (remember he had a few good seasons especially in Pittsburgh) he could have thrown one on a day where he was effectively wild.
The official scorer and the umpire have dozens of chances every game to blow a call like that. It doesn't taint anything. its part of the game. Go to one of those sites that track the balls/strike calls. You might as well have retarded monkeys on acid behind the plate. And how many times do you see the official scorer generously give a guy an error to keep a no hit bid going? All the time. Stop being a dick.
screwing up balls and strikes, missing close calls and missing a ball where chalk flies up are completely different things. If Met fans didn't realize this they wouldn't be so sensitive about it.
This. Beltran had his chance to get a hit after that blown call. He did not get one. Oh well... that's the way the cookie crumbles. No hit for Beltran. No hitter for Johan. Good on him. No reasonable person considers the accomplishment tainted.
Yeah, that is what I wrote earlier in the thread. The at-bat continued and Beltran did not get a hit. It is similar to Galarraga's "perfect game." It was not a perfect game because he faced 28 batters.
Yankees fan coming in peace, I think the no hitter is 100% legitimate. The call wasn't made on the last play of the game. There were still innings and batters left that could have gotten hits. Missed calls happen all the time in the baseball and every team has benefited from it at one point
Wrong, reality says it's a no hitter and you claiming it's tainted is no more valid then me saying Fred Brown was point shaving when he handed the ball to James Worthy in the 1982 national title game. Or me saying that Chris Weber should have been called for a travel and therefore no technical foul called and Carolina should have had to inbound the ball which could have resulted Michigan forcing a 5 second call or stealing the inbounds pass. I'm gonna use junc logic here, Michael Jordan pushed off to hit that series and title clincher against the Jazz in 98 so it's a tainted title because it was clearly a foul and should have been called. Now reality: It was a judgement call that the umpire/ref may have gottrn wrong and it doesn't taint anything.
You can't look at a a judgement call and say it's tainted because the call may have been wrong. If the umpire was in on some type of vast conspiracy then you could say tainted but the umpire did not make the call to ensure that Santana got a no hitter.
Yeah and at the end of the day nobody is going to remember how it happened. They are going to remember Johan Santana threw the first no hitter in Mets history. That is it.
You are dealing in hypotheticals, I am dealing in a fact. It was clear he gave up a hit, if Fred brown doesn't panic and pass it to Worthy GU still has to make a shot. If they call the travel on Webber Carolina has the ball up 2 and would have been going to the line. Jordan did push off, that's not a good comparison. It would be more like pre replay if they ruled a player out of bounds on a catch when he was clearly in or the other way around. He gets credit for the no hitter but it is tainted b/c we all know he actually gave up a hit. But it's not a judgement call, chalk flew up- that removes all judgement. It wasn't balls and strikes, it wasn't a close play at a base. It was black and white.
Any call by a human umpire is a judgment call. Knoblauch's phantom tag in the 99 ALCS? The ump missed the call. It was black and white... but it still was a judgment call, and the ump got it wrong. You are welcome to think it's tainted all you want. Just know you're being ridiculous. Okay, Testaverde's "touchdown" in 98, when he was down about a yard and a half short of the goal line.
Umps call phantom tags at 2nd all the time, that's not black and white like seeing chalk fly up. Did Vinny reach a milestone that day? that's an awful comparison especially since Keyshawn was forced out a play earlier when he scored a TD.
In real time you would have to say it's very hard to see chaulk fly up at all. In slow-moe you can only see a little. The ref got the call wrong but it was a very hard call to get right. Also, there are a lot of questionable calls made in no hitters. Questionable errors called or traps in the outfield that get called catches it happends. This No-Hitter is like a lot of them. I guess you would have to review all 251 no-hitters on tape and only allow those without questionable calls if you think like that. Human error by the umps (and players) is part of the game. Yankee fans will try to make a big deal of this and they are wrong and would not be causing a fuss if it benefited their Yankees.
I still don't see how you can say an asterik should be by the no hit game or it is tainted. If were to go back through every no hitter I bet we could find "errors" that are really hits or foul balls that are fair or some problem with them. Baseball wants everyone to appreciate the "human element" and this is the human element. This is a game where ball and strikes are arbitrary and strike zones are consistently inconsistent. The only reason to say this is "tainted" is to be a jerk or then you probably believe at least half of baseball history is "tainted"
You said what I wanted to say much better. As a Yankees fan I wouldn't be complaining and be annoyed if people said it was tainted so obviously I don't think its tainted. He threw a no-hitter. The other team had 0 hits. Done. Johan Santana threw a no-hitter.
