Instant replay--maybe.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

After all, who would not want a called double turned into a home run, or a called foul become the same?

The pitcher?

[canadaump6]

We cannot ruin the tradition of baseball by changing calls based on what an instant replay shows. That is for hockey only. I wouldn't mind though if they showed replays of a close call; more entertainment for the fans, thus more revenue, thus higher umpire salaries. Everybody wins.

[DonInKansas]

Originally Posted by canadaump6

We cannot ruin the tradition of baseball by changing calls based on what an instant replay shows. That is for hockey only.

And football and tennis and basketball and damn near every other sport.........

With the stupidity that is the alignment of baseball stadiums and their funky signs/colors/walls and ground rules, I'm all right with getting it right for HR and fair/foul calls at the pole. Using "tradition" to excuse something that can be fixed easily is idiotic. The replay will take less time than the manager's tirade and subsequent ejection over the blown call.

[Interested Ump]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Just read another story that said if Selig approves, he then has to run it by the owners. If they say "go for it", both the players association and the umpires association also have to approve it. It sounds like the process will take about eleventeen years.

It might take eleventeen minutes. My bet is that Selig had a clear poll of the Owner's. I am surprised this has taken as long as it has. The suspense factor, the emotional outbursts when your team gets hosed, it's marketing, it's hype, it's...

Oh, getting the right call. Forgot that one.

[gordon30307]

Personally, I'd hate to see IR. Baseball just does not lend itself well to this. The games are long enough as it is with out IR.

I'm afraid that once the door is open other plays will be subject to review as well taking the human element out of the game.

[UMP25]

My only real question is this: unlike football, where a team has to use a timeout to challenge something--and said timeout is not "used" if they win the challenge--how would this be done in baseball without totally reworking the rules? Would it be done via a challenge? If not, how? Methinks this is something that must be worked out if I.R. is gonna work at all.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by UMP25

My only real question is this: unlike football, where a team has to use a timeout to challenge something--and said timeout is not "used" if they win the challenge--how would this be done in baseball without totally reworking the rules? Would it be done via a challenge? If not, how? Methinks this is something that must be worked out if I.R. is gonna work at all.

My proposal:

If the replay does not result in a change of the call, the calling umpire gets to kick the skipper who appealed the play in the balls.

[fitump56]

fitump commenting:

Ready?

Here comes the Tpo Four "Reasons" to not have IR.

Woops, I mean the Tpo Four Whines About IR.

Whine One:

Originally Posted by gordon30307

Personally, I'd hate to see IR.

Always followed by:

Baseball just does not lend itself well to this.

Whine Three:

The games are long enough as it is with out IR.

Now we get to the real point, it might put piss poor umpires out of work, make them look (more) foolish than they ae...ad infinitum.

Whine Four:

I'm afraid that once the door is open other plays will be subject to review as well taking the human element out of the game.

Yes, next will come "Do yo want robot PUs and blah blah blah

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by UMP25

My only real question is this: unlike football, where a team has to use a timeout to challenge something--and said timeout is not "used" if they win the challenge--how would this be done in baseball without totally reworking the rules? Would it be done via a challenge? If not, how? Methinks this is something that must be worked out if I.R. is gonna work at all.

It is hardly a big deal. Managers ask all the time for an umpire to get some help....a TV review of a ball in the stands or fair/foul is just a logical extension of that request.

The NBA and NHL already review plays without a coach request.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

It is hardly a big deal. Managers ask all the time for an umpire to get some help....

Here's what makes it, if not a big deal, then certainly a "trickier" deal: While a manager might ask for help, we are not necessarily always obliged to seek it.

If IR slips in, there has to be some mechanism to determine when it would be used. Would it be used at the request of the manager or the discretion of the umpires?

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Tee, ESPN is now reporting that the players' union and the umpires would also have to approve the change.

I do not see the Umpires as having much say in the matter if both the owners and players union approve. If the owners and players Union approve then Bud wouldn't stand in the way.

I am not certain but if the GM's voted 25-5 then it stands to reason that for all practical purposes the owners have already given their vote of confidence.

Therefore, all that is left is for the players union to agree and then it is a done deal.

Pete Booth

[GarthB]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth]

I do not see the Umpires as having much say in the matter if both the owners and players union approve.

They may have contractual right of approval.

I am not certain but if the GM's voted 25-5 then it stands to reason that for all practical purposes the owners have already given their vote of confidence.

Not necessarily. It wouldn't be the first time that owners voted the opposite of the GM's.

Therefore, all that is left is for the players union to agree and then it is a done deal.

Perhaps.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Here's what makes it, if not a big deal, then certainly a "trickier" deal: While a manager might ask for help, we are not necessarily always obliged to seek it.

If IR slips in, there has to be some mechanism to determine when it would be used. Would it be used at the request of the manager or the discretion of the umpires?

It could be either.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by BretMan
Here's what makes it, if not a big deal, then certainly a "trickier" deal: While a manager might ask for help, we are not necessarily always obliged to seek it.

If IR slips in, there has to be some mechanism to determine when it would be used. Would it be used at the request of the manager or the discretion of the umpires?

Originally Posted by jimpiano

It could be either.

Sure hope it is.

Then we'll see which umpires hide behing their girlie skirts; the same ones who are always mouthing about getting the call right.

There are going to be some egos deflated for sure. Good.