Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: AdamKilgoreWP and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Sports and Redskins  |  RSS

Nationals protest game against Padres over lineup card mix-up

The Nationals are playing tonight's game under protest after the Padres committed an error with their lineup card. The Padres listed Adam Russell, a right-handed reliever who was sent down to Class AAA Portland today, as the starting pitcher. In fact, scheduled starter Clayton Richard started.

After the top of the first, manager Jim Riggleman and Bud Black each met with the entire umpiring crew. The Nationals filed a protest, and the umpires accepted it, meaning they believe the protest is valid enough to pass on to the league office.

Two excepts from the official rulebook make the chances of overturning a Nationals loss appear grim. Rule 3.05(c) states, in part, "If the improper pitcher is permitted to pitch, any play that results is legal." Also, a comment under Rule 4.01 states in part, "Teams should not be 'trapped' later by some mistake that obviously was inadvertent and which can be corrected before the game starts."

As of the middle of the fourth inning, the Nationals are making the protest a moot point. Josh Willingham crushed a three-run home run to put the Nationals ahead, 3-0.

By Adam Kilgore  |  May 28, 2010; 10:21 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Game 49 discussion thread: Nationals at Padres
Next: Justin Maxwell sent to Syracuse again

Comments

Stop! Hammer time.

Nice to wake up to another curly W in the books!

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | May 29, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

excepts translation is excerpts

Posted by: fearturtle44 | May 29, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Da Hammer!!!

Posted by: M20832 | May 29, 2010 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Surely all protests have to be passed on to the League office. What would be the point of letting the umpires decide whether a challenge to one of their decisions was worthy of review?

Posted by: markfromark | May 29, 2010 11:28 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company