I appreciate the distinction, and that makes sense in view of the rules.
However, this inserts the scorer's opinion into the mix, which defeats the purpose of the stat. If a grounder is considered intentional and ruled a sacrifice, is really that different than just making contact to advance runners and then hauling ass to 1st?
It may be considered by some a bit of semantics, but there is a great deal of difference between "opinion" and "judgment." The scorer uses judgment, and if his judgment hasn't largely been very widely upheld, he won't be, or at least should not be, a scorer very long. There are some bad ones, such as in Atlanta#, that play favorites and skew the stats - the scorer's first loyalty is supposed to be to the league and integrity of the game so that stats from game to game, team to team, year to year are comparable. Though provided by the home team, he is a representative of the league, not a team, and should not show any bias.
The only time judgment is used in these situations is whether or not the batter was bunting for a hit or bunting for a sac. The situation (score, inning, number of outs), reactions of the runners, and batter history, etc. all come into consideration. If there is any doubt, it is considered to be an attempt to sac. Even if you have a guy like the 2003 vintage of Juan Pierre, who often bunted for hits, if put into a sac bunt situation, if the bunt does not result in a hit, it is to be considered a sac as the primary intent was to move the runner and give up an out.
Every full swing, check swing, or ball that hits the bat without intent on the batter (batter ducking away from an inside pitch and the pitch hits the bat) that results in a fair ball is considered an attempt for a hit.
# In violation of the rules, the Braves apparently have an open phone line from the dugout to the scorer. The scorer is supposed to have a position in the booth directly behind the plate so that all scorers have essentially the same view of the game, and no member of the press nor anyone affiliated with either team is permitted to contact the scorer during the game so as there are no outside influences in judgment. No member of the media or any team affiliate is allowed to speak to the scorer during the game. The scorer is only allowed to communicate with the press via hand signals or the PA system. There have been some incidents reported of Smoltz and Chipper calling the scorer during a Braves home game, and the weenie scorer provided by the Braves lets the Braves players and managers make the calls.
In the NCAA, the rules are slightly relaxed in that while there must be closed door between the media and the scorer, the scorer can open the door and announce a judgment that cannot reflected on a scoreboard or hand signals, is not a generally used for a PA announcement, and if the media booth does not have access to online gameday update (media is responsible for bringing its own computer) to communicate rulings such as a single with advance to 2B being considered a FC. Sac bunt vs bunting for a hit are generally so obvious that there is no reason to communicate. It is surprising how many members of the media, and even visiting sports information directors do not know the basic rules, such as PB and WP are not errors, that a C throw on a steal attempt that does not result in further advancement cannot ever be ruled and E, that if such a throw is good but not field properly or the 2B goes Uggla and fails to tag the runner, or even fails to cover the bag at all, that it is a CS/E-4. We had another on during an exhibition in October when after 2 outs, the 1B rolled the ball to the mound and left the field, permitting a run to score. E-3. There are still a lot of people that falsely believe a fielder must touch a ball to be charged a fielding error. The one that bugs me though is the high pop that 2 or three guys wait under, and then let it drop between them. That should be an E, but in order to keep stats comparable, which is the primary objective, it usually is given as a H because that is the way is inexplicably has been judged for decades.
There is one situation where due to not having camera views much better than my own perspective that I do seek outside help, and that is on some WP vs PB where due to views blocked by the catcher and ump that from the press box I cannot see if a pitch was in the dirt, and their being too much noise that it prevents hearing anything. In that case, I'll have separate runners go to each dugout and ask if the pitch was in the dirt. I only had to do that twice last year, and fortunately both benches agreed both times. I have camera aimed at the plate from the sidelines this year, which I can use to make those calls without technically breaking the rules.
In 2006, Maddux had a play in FL changed 2.5 months later so that a hit was ruled an error to improve his ERA. The play in question was a 2-out sharp grounder to SS, who went to his right to field the ball a few feet in the outfield grass, and then made a hurried off-balance one-hop throw to 1b that was cleanly fielded. However, Hanley beat the throw by about 2 steps. The Fish scored 5 runs after the play. The change was lobbied months 2.5 months after the play although the original ruling was beyond any question correct, and any request for changes must be made within 24 hours after a game is completed. Selig had the NL change the ruling to benefit Maddux. It was complete BS, and resulted in Maddux ERA at the time dropping by 0.39 to get away from the about 5.00 he had at the time.
