OT: Why Are News Services Saying that ARod Tied for Second Place on RBI List?
 

I know RBIs were not an official stat before 1920, but how can Elias eliminate Ruth's pre-1920 RBIs, and all of Cap Anson's RBIs, and say that ARod and Bonds are currently tied for #2 on the list?

Was wondering the same...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably same reason people think Nolan Ryan is the single season strikeout leader or Rickey Henderson is the single season stolen base leader. If something is old, it scares them.

Yah, but Ruth's numbers aren't that old

Arod is second on the "official" list. Since the RBI wasn't recognized as an official stat until 1922 or so, prior RBIs are not official.

Which of course makes no sense.

I especially love it when some stat list is shown during a game on TV, and in the fine print it says: "Since 1970." I guess, because that's approximately when the broadcast's producer was born. In other words, when the Universe was created.

I've also been baffled by this, it is sacrilegious that they're discounting Ruth and Anson's RBI's...WTF? I actually called ESPN last week to correct their scroll across the bottom of the screen regarding this, now they say "official list" when mentioned.