[Larry1953]

Pujols hit a line drive shot to CF that was originally ruled a HR (bottom of 1st, R1, 2 outs). Cards announcer Mike Shannon reviewed the replay and immediately said it just hit the top of the wall and on review "it will probably end up a ground rule double with the runner who was sure to score being sent back to third. It amazed him that after further review it was confirmed to be a HR and he went on to disagree several times as the game went on.

Several points: 1) the review rule disarmed the vociferous argument that was sure to happen without one. 2) I thought if they overturned the HR they would place the runners to whatever bases according to judgment as opposed to the bookrule double bounding over the fence. (this is what makes using replay for catch/trap in the outfield with runners on). 3) One would think MLB umpires would err on the side of "no HR" on questionable calls to let the play go on so the runners determine their own advance. If it is changed to HR after review, heck, all you have to do is send everyone to home.

So, even the Cards announcer did not think it was a HR. How hard would it be to provide the viewer with a stop-action view that shows the "evidence" that was used for the decision from the replay?