http://iscoresports.com/

I'd like to see a better way of scoring a compound play. Here's the situation:

- Runners on 1st and 2nd
- Batter hits a single to right
- Base runners advance; batter safe at 1st
- RF boots the ball, allowing the runner who started at 2nd to go home

So what really happened is a hit for a single, each runner advanced one base on the hit, then an E9 to score the run.

When I score the hit, I'm asked what happened to the runner who started on 2nd. I enter that he reached home on the E9. Runner on 1st advanced to 2nd by batter.

The play-by-play reflects what happened for the most part. But on the scorecard, it shows that the runner who started on 2nd reached 3rd on the E9, as well as home on E9. I'd like to see him reaching 3rd on the hit, and home on the E9.

I can make that happen by splitting the play into two steps. When I record the hit, I can say that the runner from 2nd reached 3rd on the hit. Then I can record a separate play in which the runner (now on 3rd) scores on an E9. But -- while that is properly reflected on the scorecard, it's not really right in the PBP.

I'd like to be able to have more granular control over the way the runners reach each base, so I could record this as a hit/error. Maybe there could be a "more" or "extra bases" button on each play to allow additional information to be connected to a given sequence. Or am I just missing a better way to handle this?

It sounds like you have already found the two ways you can score it now (both will give the correct stats which is the key). We could add steps to make scorekeeping even more complicated, but most users are requesting simplification, not adding steps to the scorekeeping process. We get asked at least every few weeks why we ask what happened to the batter after you just entered a single. Your scenario is exactly why. But if we then added even another step after that, basic users would really become overwhelmed.

In responding to the last statement, both of your own suggested ways of scoring already allow you to record this as a hit + error.

We will continue trying to balance ease of scorekeeping with depth of information captured and trying not to sacrifice on either front. In this case, no additional statistical information would be gathered, so it is hard to justify spending a lot of effort on this, but if others start chiming in and saying it is important, we would definitely go with what the iScore community wants.

Leave it as is IMO

I think you need to look at the PBP in a wider view - it took me a little while but when I thought about it, it is obvious when reading the PBP, that the secondary part of the scenario took place before the next pitch and thus was part of the last "play" in the PBP. So I look at PBP more as play by play, defining plays as a number of actions that occur after any one pitch.

Therefore, I would also not change how iscore handles this - it is fine the way it is