Page 4 of 5

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 14 17, 1:37 pm
by Swirls
Fat Strat wrote:
Swirls wrote:
Fat Strat wrote:
Apparently the Elias Sports Bureau got involved, and it sounded like the game was called after 8 innings due to darkness (which was actually pretty common back in that era - there were other games during that streak that were called after 7 innings or 8.1 innings) but was never made up.
I heard the rep from Elias yesterday talking about it on a radio show and he said very specifically that the same game was replayed the next day.
Interesting. Chalk up another one to Steve Phillips being an idiot.
That we can agree on.

It was a fascinating interview if you can find it -- Mike and Mike, ESPN, Wed. morning. It would have been about 7:45-8 am central time as I pulled up to the office. I remember sitting in my car listening for awhile because it was fascinating. Worth a listen. The Elias rep was outstanding.
Thanks, I'll check it out.

The Phillips/Nitkowski bit was on MLB Network around 6:10ish central time this morning.

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 14 17, 2:00 pm
by Kincaid
Tie games in the past were basically the equivalent of suspended games today, except instead of picking up from where the game left off, they had to start over and replay it in its entirety. It wasn't until 2007 that MLB changed the rules to just resume from the point where the game stopped (although there were specific circumstances before the rule change when a game could be suspended and completed later, and it's still possible for a game to be called a tie if a suspended game is never resumed).

Player statistics from tie games were considered official, but for the purposes of a team's record and schedule, they were completely ignored. Tie games didn't count in the standings or in a team's winning percentage, and they were essentially stricken from the schedule and had to be replayed as if the game were cancelled (though like rainouts or other cancelled games, they weren't always replayed if it wasn't convenient or necessary). Functionally, it worked more or less as if the game had been suspended, and you count those stats from the first half of the game along with the makeup game, but only one final result from the two days of play. The players did get credited with two games played, but the team's record didn't reflect that, which is why, for example, the 1916 Giants official record is 86-66 rather than 86-66-3 even though the team's players got credit for playing in 155 games.

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 14 17, 2:20 pm
by ghostrunner
"Antonetti would have won"

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 14 17, 7:27 pm
by MrCrowesGarden
They trail the Royals 2-1 going into the 8th inning.

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 14 17, 8:15 pm
by MrCrowesGarden
Lindor tied it up with 2 outs in the 9th.

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 14 17, 8:32 pm
by MrCrowesGarden
The streak continues.

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 14 17, 9:33 pm
by Radbird

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 15 17, 12:02 am
by CardsofSTL
Radbird wrote:
Oh snap.

I hope the Indians beat the Giants record. After that I will stop caring.

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 15 17, 8:22 pm
by MrCrowesGarden
It's all over. 4-3 Royals.

Re: Cleveland Going For 21st Straight Win

Posted: September 15 17, 8:26 pm
by TheTimeIsNow
Attendance tomorrow will be back under 20,000 in Cleveland.