Replay is in the Air

[Kaliix]

GM's discuss replay options

Seems like Windy may be on to something. Baseball is at least entertaining the idea of replay. Don't know if it will ever become a reality, but they are considering it.

Interesting how the wrote that West over-ruled Marsh even though it was clearly Marsh that changed his own call.

[ozzy6900]

I still say that IR will be the death of baseball!

[Bob Lyle]

Originally posted by ozzy6900
I still say that IR will be the death of baseball!

The death of baseball has been predicted for years. Remember the DH rule. It was predicted that it would kill the American League. Remember the strikes. Each one was predicted to destroy baseball. Remember George Steinbrenner. It was predicted that his antics would destroy baseball. Likewise the Pete Rose scandal was also predicted to destroy baseball. Baseball will survive IR, if it comes to pass. Maybe the owners will put scantily clad cheerleaders on the field while the umps review the replays.

[gordon30307]

Saw the article. Pertains to home runs that may be fair or foul. Article also says the umpires are not in favor of instant replay. Hard to see other than the above where the ball is dead how replay can work in baseball since action is continous and the ball remains live.

[GarthB]

Originally posted by Bob Lyle

The death of baseball has been predicted for years. Remember the DH rule. It was predicted that it would kill the American League. Remember the strikes. Each one was predicted to destroy baseball. Remember George Steinbrenner. It was predicted that his antics would destroy baseball. Likewise the Pete Rose scandal was also predicted to destroy baseball. Baseball will survive IR, if it comes to pass. Maybe the owners will put scantily clad cheerleaders on the field while the umps review the replays.

Even longer ago, almost everything Charles O. Finley did was supposed to be the death of baseball.

[rulesmaven]

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.

[Sal Giaco]

I know baseball traditionalists and perhaps most umpires will not like instant reply, however, I'm in favor of a LIMITED application of it (similar to the NBA). I'm sure they will thoroughly scrutinze what type of plays are reviewable and there is nothing wrong if homeruns and fair/fouls are considered plays that can be looked at. Afterall, think of how bad Richie Garcia felt after looking at the replays after the game which showed he infact made an incorrect ruling. If instant replay was used on that play, the call would have been reversed and the runners placed accordingly - nobody says anything. Instead, the whole world watching on TV knew he made a mistake and they buried Garcia for it - and he probably felt like crap because NO umpire wants to make an incorrect call that decides the outcome of the game.

I would hope that MLB consults the umpire supervisors when making this decision but I believe, in certain situations, instant replay may save a lot of grief for umpires in the long run - ask Don Denkinger.

Just my opinion - I'm sure many of you will disagee.

[PeteBooth]

Seems like Windy may be on to something. Baseball is at least entertaining the idea of replay. Don't know if it will ever become a reality, but they are considering it.

Interesting how the wrote that West over-ruled Marsh even though it was clearly Marsh that changed his own call.

I am in favor of IR in determining whether a ball was a HR or not. On a HR or ground rule double for that matter, the ball is Dead, so you do not have to worry about continuous action.

The problem is if they start using IR on catch / No catch because you could have continuous action that is effected.

IMO, the real reason why MLU's will object to IR would be less assignments, meaning if IR were used no need to have 6 umpires in the Championship Series. Heck the Left field ump in the Yanks/Bosox series missed an obvious HR anyway, so if MLB needs more cameras, they can cut out the 6 man umpiring crews.

Baseball has changed over the years and the old adage "it's tradition" does not apply anymore. The field dimensions of the new ball parks changed - ie; shorter fences. The mound height was changed. We have the DH rule which IMO is simply ludicrous. You can use the DH in the American League park but not the National.

There used to be simply a National / American League with each winner playing for the world series. We now have Several Divisions plus a Wild card team. The players union is stronger than ever before.

Therefore, in a nutshell baseball has changed dramatically over the years so they should experiment with the use of replay at least on fair / Foul for HR's.

Pete Booth

[WindyCityBlue]

Not me...

I like the idea of instant replay in professional baseball. I like the idea of umpire conferences in amateur baseball.

Have those topics ever been discussed here? It seems like true baseball minds would appreciate and advocate any change that betters the game and gets the call right. Has that ever been discussed here?


BTW - Thank you for the recognition, Kaliix!

[Sal Giaco]

So much for instant replay - I just read that the GM's are split down the middle (15 yes & 15 no) on the issue. According to Sandy Alderson, the issue will be put on the "back burner" for now.

BTW, does anyone remember the play in the playoffs a few years back where a runner from first base was advancing to second and F4 reached back and clearly missed the tag but the second base umpire (who was probably straightlined) called him out? Who was the umpire, teams, runner, fielder involved??? Just wondering

[LMan]

has anyone discussed the idea of giving managers a certain number of 'challenges', as in the NFL? Since the mgr is going to come out and argue the call anyway, he might as well ask the crew chief to "go to the hooded monitor."

[PWL]

Originally Posted by LMan

has anyone discussed the idea of giving managers a certain number of 'challenges', as in the NFL? Since the mgr is going to come out and argue the call anyway, he might as well ask the crew chief to "go to the hooded monitor."

Yeah, yeah that's the ticket. Are you related to Rush Limbaugh?