|
Everyone is going to focus on the Bellhorn and A-Rod plays, but I just don't think replay is going to be that helpful. As already noted, the situations in which the toothpaste can be put back in the tube on live ball situations are not extensive. You simply cannot say that post-live ball call action should always be a nullity without creating some very weird or inequitable situations.
But more than that, I just don't think for the most part replay is all that conclusive in baseball, particularly on the fair/foul home run. Sometimes it's clear from the camera, but many many times, the view shown on television is completely misleading, particularly where the ball's flight takes it higher than the pole and fence. That call is all about angles and I don't believe that any of these cameras are located exactly down the line. There was a play in the world series where David Ortiz hit a ball above the pole down the right field line. From the camera angle, it appeared to be about 15 feet foul. But if you know Fenway and you saw where in the seats the ball ultimately landed, it was very clear that either (1) it was much closer than 15 fee5, or (2) there was some serious wind that got a hold of it between the ball passing by the pole and it landing in the seats (unlikely).
I guess those in favor of reply would say that, as in football, a "clearly erroneous" or "indispuatable evidence" standard should apply and would fix these problems. My problem, though, is that baseball is much more a game of angles, sounds, and three dimensions. It is also a game the officiating of which often depends on judgment and indirect evidence and observation that, in the hands of an experienced umpire, is as reliable or more so than direct evidence. Replay in football is often not conclusive, but virtually never misleading. I do not think the same would be true of replay in baseball.
|