Quote:
Originally posted by mbyron
Quote:
Originally posted by JRutledge
When was the time that every call should be up for debate or opinions from partners? How do we even know that any other umpire could have given any kind of help on this call?
|
You don't have to think that umpires should get help on every call to think that Gibson should have gotten help on this one, because (a) it was a weird play where Gibson (through no fault of his) found himself out of position; (b) LaRussa came out to challenge it, and (c) Gibson was clearly wrong.
AND, this kind of play gives ammunition to those who want replay in baseball. The "get it right" mentality, whatever its defects, is designed in part to keep replay out of baseball.
I guess I still wonder what's the harm in asking? Sure, it's Gibson's call - he made it, on time, and sold it. But why not get help? "Tim, did you see the play?" McClelland: "no, I was set for the relay to first/ OR/ yes, I saw it, and he missed the tag." Either way works for me.
|
As Jim Evans has noted, as many calls are called wrong after "huddles" as called right.
What happens when U2 thinks he's right, but goes to ask U3 who has a different opinion, but also thinks he's right? What assurance do we have that the new call is any better than the first? Not every instance will be black and white.
Does that matter in this ONE instance? You bet. Each time "help" is solicted outside of the normal "help" plays, it furthers the practice, encourages coaches to demand help on other, "non help" plays, encourages umpires to make calls without working as hard to get the proper look, slows down the game and does not guarantee that the right call will be made. Call it what you want, slippery slope, the camels nose in the tent...dangerous precedent.
There at times help is proper and has the best chance of getting a call right. This isn't one of them.
The imperfection of players, coaches and umpires are part of baseball. So is second guessing and griping.
Just play ball.