Outside The Confines: No no-no? Oh no!

Ah, major league rule changes, aren’t they fun? This season, in order to expedite game times, MLB maintained the rule that all doubleheader games would be played as two seven-inning games rather than nine-inning games. These seven-inning games would be considered complete in terms of MLB game rules.

Except one thing no one considered when establishing this new rule was what would happen if a pitcher threw a no-hitter during one of those league-mandated seven-inning games. On Sunday night, that turned out to be something the league should have thought about ahead of time.

During a Sunday game, Diamondbacks starter Madison Bumgarner threw a no-hitter against the Braves. Except he didn’t. While Bumgarner went through all seven innings of the complete game without giving up a hit, MLB rules clearly state that for a no-hitter to count the pitcher (or pitchers) must get through a complete game of nine innings, with the nine being explicitly stated in the rules.

So there were no hits given up in the game, but it does not at present stand as a no-hitter. This topic is, naturally, being wildly debated online, as purists (myself included) think the nine-inning rule should stand, as many, many no-hitters are given up thanks to the times through the order penalty; while others (who also have a point) are adamant that if the games have been shortened by MLB intentionally, then the no-hitter should stand since the game wasn’t shortened by weather or outside factors.

The no-hitter may get a second look by MLB and the coming days will confirm whether or not Bumgarner will get to claim the official no-no, but for now it’s just one of those weird little anomalies.

• Tyler Kepner looks at the not-a-no-no for The New York Times.
• David Schoenfield explains why the no-no is a faux-no and not the real deal.
• Jon Greenberg brings us the story of a rabbi and a baseball club president (who happen to be brothers) and the importance of their faith in everything they do. (The Athletic subscription required.)
• Ever wonder why there are so many pitchers named Zach? I hadn’t until Anthony Castrovince pointed out just how frequently ballplayers named Zach (or Zac, or Zack, or Zak) are pitchers.
• It can be difficult to find positives to the reduced seating in most stadiums (except of course for the health and safety aspects) but Andrew Beaton and Joshua Robinson have found something else to be enthusiastic about: there’s never been a better time to catch a foul ball at a game.
• Chet Gutwein takes a look at how bullpens are being utilized so far this year.
• Jazz Chisholm Jr. is precisely the kind of fun player baseball needs right now, and Shakeia Taylor spotlights the Marlins newest star.
• The absolute highlight of the weekend was Fernando Tatis Jr. rounding the bases with one eye covered off a home run given up by Trevor Bauer (who admitted during spring training to pitching with one eye closed for an inning.) This is the fun kind of petty that baseball needs more of.

• And don’t worry, Trevor Bauer admitted to thinking it was all in good spirit. Though I suppose we’ll see how true that is the next time Tatis Jr faces a Dodgers pitcher, especially since...
• It seems, according to Juan Toribio, that Tatis Jr. might have caught a look at the catcher’s signs during his at-bat, which is a lot less okay in Bauer’s books than showboating.
• Tess Taruskin looks at how the A’s have turned things around for themselves after a dismal start to the season.
• Alas the A’s winning streak ended at 13 games, shares Andrew Gastelum. Guess it won’t be Moneyball: the Sequel just yet.
• Garrett Crochet managed to pitch through sweat and literal blood during his Sunday outing, as Scott Merkin points out that Crochet was visibly bleeding from the thumb for at least part of his three innings of work.
• Ben Carsley helps you pick what cursed piece of Le Creuset MLB cookware you are.
• I love baseball weirdness.

And tomorrow will be a better day than today, Buster. Make it so.