[umpjong]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

I thought the tone was a tad arrogant and snotty considering how poorly written the replay procedure is and how it leaves itself open to a rather logical protest that can be reasonably argued. And it would keep guys like West from having to lie to shoehorn their calls within the confines of the written procedure.

So you continue to ignore facts when presented to you? Who would have thought?

Some have erroneously and speciously claimed the only thing instant replay can be used for is to determine whether a home run was a home run. This is not factual. The rule clearly allows for determinations of whether a ball that bounced off the top of a wall, or a foul pole, or was interfered with by a fan and then bounced back onto the field of play, should have been a home run. The claim that the initial ruling on the field had to be a home run is beyond ridiculous. For that would mean the instant replay rule could only be used to negate home runs.

Anyone who even briefly researches the instant replay rule and its history knows this not to be the case. Therefore, it's clear that once Fairchild believed the initial ruling may have been incorrect, and that fan interference may have prevented a home run for Pence, West not only had the authority to initiate an instant replay review, he was compelled to by the rule.

Furthermore, as West himself stated, once the review was underway, he could not ignored evidence gleaned from the review, and could not ignore the fan interference that was obvious from the video evidence. Those arguing he should have ignored all common sense, and apparently believe MLB would agree their umpires should so narrowly interpret the instant replay rule (which doesn't specifically or expressly forbid them from considering such evidence once the review has been initiated) as to ignore that evidence, and the infractions it may include, are simply wrong.

Quoted from the above posted article/ http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ycn-9080723