Arrogance or Just a Boot?
 

Why not review this?

Orioles vs Rangers

I didn't see the game so I don't know how it finished. But, I thought reviews were limited to if the ball was fair or not. Not, if it was a HR or not.

That is just my understanding of its purpose.

I believe the first replay rule that was instituted was to allow Major League umpires to review whether a ball hit such as this was a homerun or not, so I'm not sure why it wouldn't be reviewed, either, unless every set of umpire eyes that was watching that ball are absolutely certain they saw it go off the top of the wall.

It's allowed for "boundary calls" - fair/foul, Fan INT, leaving the field of play...

I just saw a clip this morning on MLB.com with a play that was almost exactly like this in Boston. Ortiz hits a ball off the top of the monster. They originally ruled the ball in play and Ortiz had a triple. After talking about it and reviewing the tape, they awarded him home.

The calling umpire was "certain." The manager of the offense didn't object "too much." So, the crew chief decided not to review it.

To his credit, the crew admitted the mistaken call.