Show me the pitcher that was pulled out of a no hitter with one or two outs to go.

8 combined no hitters, only 2 for reasons other than MAX pitch count (Babe Ruth got ejected, Kent Mercker got injured).

Including, might I add, one 8 2/3 IP starter.

Probably because he hit his MAXIMUM pitch count. Kind of like the MAXIMUM pitch count that's in HBD.

Really, here's what I hope for;

I hope that everyone that wants their fake players to get fake no hitters to rant and rave until WIFS develops a check box that says "leave pitcher in game if pitching a no hitter? Yes _ No _"

I hope they all check yes.

Then, I hope that their 25 yr old stud that's 55 health gets a start on less than 95 rest, and on the 164th pitch, goes down for 245 days. Really, that's what I hope for.

I also hope that I see the thread that ******* about it.

I also hope that the reliever promptly gives up a single. But I'm not set on getting it ALL my way.

Let's try a boxscore-level accounting of combined no-hitters.
#1-- the Babe Ruth/Ernie Shore game you referenced.  Pulled because he was ejected.
#2-- Steve Barber did, in fact go 8.2 innings in this one.  But Barber walked two guys, threw a WP, and gave up a run in the 9th in a 2-1 game; he was pulled for ineffectiveness, probably, not on pitch count.  They thought winning was more important than a no-no.
#3-- Last game of the season.  Vida Blue was on a pitch count but only because he was tuning up for the playoffs; pulled after 5, and that wasn't his real pitch count at the time.  Pitch count with an asterisk.
#4-- Blue Moon Odom pulled after 5 on a pitch count-- but it was a "bullpen day" for the ChiSox, and Odom had gone 1.2 IP 4 days earlier.  Somewhat of an asterisk here.
#5-- Mark Langston went 7 innings in his first start of the season; he wasn't "stretched out" yet.  Another pitch count with an asterisk.
#6-- Bob Milacki went 6, wasn't particularly wild, was on 10 days rest due to the ASB, and had a 2-0 lead.  I assume the manager decided it was Bob Milacki we are talking about and went to his pen for the win-- but this one is a true pitch count combined no-no.
#7-- Kent Mercker pulled after 6; he'd been a reliever all season but was in his second start after being put in the rotation.  Another pitch count with an asterisk.
#8-- Francisco Cordoba went 9 and got pulled on pitch count-- that's an asterisk, too.
#9-- Roy Oswalt got hurt in the first inning.

So it's VERY unusual for a SP pitching a no-hitter to get pulled on pitch count without extenuating circumstances, at least as far as games in which the no-hitter is completed.  But it does happen. 

And I think the programming is fine the way it is, not that it's a big deal one way or the other.

Posted by shobob on 1/25/2011 1:09:00 PM (view original):
Show me the pitcher that was pulled out of a no hitter with one or two outs to go.

Why?  I'm not lobbying for change.   The person(s) lobbying for change has the burden of proof.    Show me the pitcher who had a PC ignored so he could get a no-hitter.

The counter argument is that what is there to say that the HBD pulls were not with said asterick. But yea.

death, if HBD players are whining about getting pulled from no-hitters when the pitcher is ejected (Ruth), is hurt (Oswalt), has a max count of 60 (Odom),  is about to lose the game (Barber), or has already pitched 9 (Cordoba), then they can't be helped.  And because HBD has no rust from not pitching (Langston and Blue, for different reasons) and you can't "stretch out" a reliever in HBD (Mercker), those 3 asterisks would never come up in HBD.

It would probably be more "realistic" if they programmed it such that, once a pitcher completes 7 no-hit innings, his target and max become 140 and his pull becomes 1 until he gives up a hit.  Plus, it comes up so rarely that it wouldn't bother me.  But I'd rather they worked on important stuff.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/25/2011 2:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shobob on 1/25/2011 1:09:00 PM (view original):
Show me the pitcher that was pulled out of a no hitter with one or two outs to go.

Why?  I'm not lobbying for change.   The person(s) lobbying for change has the burden of proof.    Show me the pitcher who had a PC ignored so he could get a no-hitter.

Edwin Jackson (6/25/10), meet MikeT23.

And I watched the last couple innings of that game; I'd have pulled him, and he was ineffective (I mean, more than his usual Edwin Jackson self, 17 ER in 22.1 IP) for a few starts afterward.  Be careful what "realism" you wish for.

Posted by dedelman on 1/25/2011 3:43:00 PM (view original):
death, if HBD players are whining about getting pulled from no-hitters when the pitcher is ejected (Ruth), is hurt (Oswalt), has a max count of 60 (Odom),  is about to lose the game (Barber), or has already pitched 9 (Cordoba), then they can't be helped.  And because HBD has no rust from not pitching (Langston and Blue, for different reasons) and you can't "stretch out" a reliever in HBD (Mercker), those 3 asterisks would never come up in HBD.

It would probably be more "realistic" if they programmed it such that, once a pitcher completes 7 no-hit innings, his target and max become 140 and his pull becomes 1 until he gives up a hit.  Plus, it comes up so rarely that it wouldn't bother me.  But I'd rather they worked on important stuff.

Yea, that's my point, is that the argument that the manager should leave the pitcher in for an infinite number of pitches is as ridiculous as he obviously hit one of these real life criteria.

The only criteria is max pitch count. ******** that a pitcher was pulled because they hit the max pitch count is inane.

Posted by dedelman on 1/25/2011 3:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/25/2011 2:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shobob on 1/25/2011 1:09:00 PM (view original):
Show me the pitcher that was pulled out of a no hitter with one or two outs to go.

Why?  I'm not lobbying for change.   The person(s) lobbying for change has the burden of proof.    Show me the pitcher who had a PC ignored so he could get a no-hitter.

Edwin Jackson (6/25/10), meet MikeT23.

And I watched the last couple innings of that game; I'd have pulled him, and he was ineffective (I mean, more than his usual Edwin Jackson self, 17 ER in 22.1 IP) for a few starts afterward.  Be careful what "realism" you wish for.

Well aware of that game.   How do you know his pitch count was exceeding?

dedelman, meet the facts you don't have. 

Mike, OK, I didn't know his pitch count; AJ Hinch and I aren't BFFs. But I think that I can exclude a reasonable doubt that he was left in beyond his pitch count, rvrn if I don't know.   Here are Jackson's pitch counts in his starts for Arizona last season, and I think you can draw some inference from these numbers:

94, 98, 109, 106, 55, 88, 103, 121,  114, 115, 102, 123, 109, 115, 107, 149, 88, 100, 110, 95, 103

Looks like his normal pitch count is 120, no?  Furthermore, AJ Hinch only allowed his SP to go into the 9th twice before he was fired, and the other guy was at 93 pitches starting the 9th.  And post-game interviews that I saw rule out the possibility that Hinch just forgot to take him out.

There is no reasonable doubt that Jackson was left in past where he would otherwise have been pulled for pitch count because he was throwing a no-hitter.  Technical doubt, sure, you can have that.  But no reasonable doubt.

Not that you care, but we agree that they shouldn't change the game.  It would be a lot of work for a trivial bit of "realism" that would make gameplay slightly worse.  But it would, in fact, make a handful of boxscores look more realistic if they changed the programming.

For fans of baseball history(and who isn't), there's this one. Yankee Bill Bevens was pitching a no-hitter with 2 out in the bottom of the 9th of Game 4 of the 1947 World Series vs the Dodgers. With 2 on and 2 out, Dodgers Cookie Lavagetto doubled home 2 runs for their only hit and a 2-1 Dodger win. Think the Mgr wished he took Bevens out of that game? Trivia-That was last hit of Lavagetto's 14 year ML career. Bevens pitched again in game 7 but never again in the ML.

Also, last year CC Sabathia had a no hitter into the 8th when he gave up a hit. Mgr Joe Girardi said later that CC was not going to pitch the 9th, no-hitter or not.

We should lobby to force MLB managers to stick to their pitch counts regardless of no-hit situations. That would make it so that WIS gameplay is more realistic, therefore making the game more fun.

Posted by dedelman on 1/25/2011 3:43:00 PM (view original):
death, if HBD players are whining about getting pulled from no-hitters when the pitcher is ejected (Ruth), is hurt (Oswalt), has a max count of 60 (Odom),  is about to lose the game (Barber), or has already pitched 9 (Cordoba), then they can't be helped.  And because HBD has no rust from not pitching (Langston and Blue, for different reasons) and you can't "stretch out" a reliever in HBD (Mercker), those 3 asterisks would never come up in HBD.

It would probably be more "realistic" if they programmed it such that, once a pitcher completes 7 no-hit innings, his target and max become 140 and his pull becomes 1 until he gives up a hit.  Plus, it comes up so rarely that it wouldn't bother me.  But I'd rather they worked on important stuff.

No they should not. Many of us do not want our pitch counts ignored no matter what the situation is. If I ended up losing my #1 starter to injury because sparky ignored my pitch count because my fake player was pitching a fake perfect game I would go balistic on CS.