No-hitter rules

Two Angels pitchers combined to hold the Dodgers without a hit last night -- but it's not officially a no-hitter, according to Major League Baseball, because the Dodgers were the home team and went into the bottom of the ninth with a 1-0 lead, so they didn't have to bat. So Jered Weaver and Jose Arredondo held them without a hit for eight innings, in a game that went the regulation nine, but do not get credit for a no-hitter.

I think that's wrong. It might not matter terribly much to Weaver and Arredondo, because they lost the game anyway, but it seems to me that if a team fails to get a hit in a nine-inning game, that's a no-hitter. When Matt Young went the distance in a loss to the Indians in 1992, it was considered a no-hitter at the time, even though the Tribe didn't bat in the bottom of the ninth. But baseball tightened up its no-hitter rules after that, and Young's was taken away, along with a few others.

I know there were a few no-hitters in games that got rained out after five or six innings, and I understand taking those away. There were also a few games in which the starter held the other team hitless in a game that went into extra innings, then gave up a hit in the 10th or later. Those were considered no-hitters for years, but no longer. I understand that too, even though it strikes me as a bit inconsistent. (Is nine innings the magic number, or isn't it?) But this is a game that went exactly nine innings. I say it's a no-hitter.