Johan Santana gets Mets first no-hitter ever with help from blown call, Mike Baxter

Johan Santana threw the first no-hitter in Mets franchise history on Friday in an 8-0 win over the Cardinals. Santana threw 133 pitches and walked five batters, but he managed to no-hit the best offense in the National League.

Although he didn’t allow any hits, Santana’s game was far from perfect. In addition to the five walks, he got some help on an umpire’s blown call, and a teammate’s great catch.

First up was a line drive down the third base line from Carlos Beltran in the sixth that was ruled foul by umpire Adrian Johnson, although replays showed it hit the chalk and therefore should have been ruled fair:

Though he didn’t see the Beltran play, he knows he got some assistance.

“There are times when one play makes the whole difference, one call makes the whole difference. If that was the case, tonight [the Beltran ball] was the call.”

In addition to the umpire’s mistake, Santana benefited from a great play in the seventh. Left fielder Mike Baxter crashed into the left-field wall chasing down a Yadier Molina fly ball:

Santana was grateful for Baxter’s effort on the play.

“When he made that catch, I didn’t even know it was in his glove,” Santana said. “It was great. It was amazing.”

“I’m glad I had a chance to be a part of that,” said Baxter.

The left fielder admitted he was sore after the game, and he’ll be further examined on Saturday.

The no-hitter was a fantastic feat for both the Mets and Santana. The Mets had played 8,019 games in 51 years before finally recording a no-hitter. This was also Santana’s first no-hitter, and it came in his 11th start this season. It’s quite the comeback after he missed all of last year because of shoulder surgery.

Around The Web

  • Anonymous

    I guess this makes up for last years blown call that cost  a pitcher a no hitter.  Even with the blown call, it was still great to see Johan return after missing all of last year.  I just wished that my brother was still alive to see this break-thru for the Mets.

  • http://twitter.com/theslymongoose sly mongoose

    i’m pretty sure if you looked at all the no hitters thrown prior to instant replay, especially all those prior to television, you’d gave a lot more of these “asterisks”
    a split-second call was made by and umpire, let it stand. they make slight mistakes all the time, it’s part of the game

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/RBRVKZIVFGJMAOK2GJHZU2H2JE KJS

    Ok, did that fall on the chalk before or after the bag?  I can’t tell on the replay.  If it’s after – I agree with slymongoose – split second call.  If it’s before – then the ump made the right call.

  • Anonymous

    just barely , barely fair, really if at all, in totally leaning 98% foul.  When i read the headlines I thought it must have been obvious but this was a difficult call and I could tell how much the ball appeared foul, I like the imperfection aspect of any sport where the point of the game is to make that immediate and neutral call, it shakes things up it should always be part of that. Sure we can play inside digital cages and perfect zones and boxes and never miss any error, but too much would be compromised with the human element to a game, too many plays , penalties and hits, etc are to be judged by intention. i think most often in baseball they get them right, it is not as necessary as say tennis to get that right always.

  • Anonymous

    also who knows , who designed the games in the first place? I would say at some point they had to agree to something and draw the line somewhere. The chalk was just not all over, it barely barely touched the chalk , that would be fair by rules, but you know when you play games its like at some point there were discrepancies when games were played, over time the rules evolved to invent the perfect points of crossing. Like if a puck goes over the line, even just a little , should it be a goal, it went into the goal. Arguments started so they make a rule, “it must completely CLEAR the goal line, the WHOLE puck must cross it” so then it becomes a rule. The WHOLE ball must be over the goal line in football, we can debate that tiny tiny fraction of a difference all the time. I think when we were children and these things were argued in wiffle ball or pick up games we would have leaned foul, for the motion and the vast majority of the ball appeared and leaned much more foul, a tiny tiny portion grabbed some chalk..By eye it did not favor the way the ball was hit. I say a very clean no hitter, not a perfect game but thats why we distinguish them but a good solid no hitter. no asterisk. even in those gray areas players can try to make it harder to tell for the quick reaction, suddenly grab the ball/puck, cover it, shove it, mis direct it illegally. Or make a motion to favor the team try to draw a bad call on reflex, that is part of the game the instant decision…

  • http://www.facebook.com/daveshoeman Dave Shoeman

    Umpire Adrian Johnson made the correct call.

  • Anonymous

    TO KJS comment
     like life hindsight can be 20/ 20 vision..or today in sports world maybe we should say “replay is 20/20 vision” …

  • Anonymous

    Life is full of breaks. Some people agree with them and some they don’t.  Think of the comments made in this article.  Did this writer ever get any breaks to be where he is today or is he one of the exceptional?  Being informed is important and I appreciate honesty but it’s just not right to put something or someone down because someone got a break you didn’t agree with.  I’m sure, during the game probably, every strike called wasn’t a strike and every ball called wasn’t a ball but you live with the break, good or bad. If we are so busy looking backwards to make sure we are always right it’s going to be hard to move forward. I’m sure there is someone who would agree it is necessary to replay probably everything so we “Get It Right”. This will defeat te enjoyment of watching the game.  Some you win and some you lose.  Some are happy and some are sad.  Let’s move on.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/L2QI52PO7PUNMTGLPL5IWKF2RU mark w

    I had the same problem looking at the replay. Was the chalk mark before or after the bag. Anyone know? Anyway about time the METS got a break

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=702853162 Joann Giovino Fagiolo

     replays should and do happen for significant issues(not for everything), they check it for home runs.. they should have checked it for this.