No-hitter got ruined by an obscure rule

Would’ve been a hit if the runner wasn’t there.

Bad rule...should be fielders choice

Maybe, but it's possible both players would have been safe if it hadn't hit him.

The secret to kids learning faster and better has been known since 1960. But it’s been impossible to implement. Technology is just starting to catch up, so we can finally use what we’ve known for years to radically change how we educate kids. Want to learn how? Read this:

But the out comes before the runner has any chance to get to first Feels like timing should be a factor here. Like when a runner scores as the third out is being applied

Those rules are screaming for an exception for the third out, where the batter is not charged with an at bat and is not awarded a hit

@TalkinBaseball_ That would have been a hit because why on earth is that 1st basemen holding him on first with 2 outs up 10-0 ?

what if it would have been a routine grounder to 2nd base? could the opposing team be dicks and break up a no hitter like that

I'm guessing the rule-writers assumed that if the runner wasn't there it would be a hit, so don't ding the batter for the runner's mistake.

I thought I'd share that my 5-year-old just straight up kicked a ball intentionally like a soccer ball while running the bases during our last game. 😂