Implement a challenge system, MLB

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I think it's fine the way it is.

I agree. Baseball is the last place where the technology doesn't rule. I'd like to see it stay that way.

[Reffing Rev.]

If I were a Detroit Tigers Fan on Wednesday, I'd rather sit through an extra 10 minutes a game every game for five years and see History made, than save 10 minutes and have an imperfect person ruin perfection...and every football official I've ever talked to who works under either NCAA or NFL replay systems thinks that having replay there makes them better officials. Lord knows MLB needs anything they can get their hands on to get better officials.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

If I were a Detroit Tigers Fan on Wednesday, I'd rather sit through an extra 10 minutes a game every game for five years and see History made, than save 10 minutes and have an imperfect person ruin perfection...and every football official I've ever talked to who works under either NCAA or NFL replay systems thinks that having replay there makes them better officials. Lord knows MLB needs anything they can get their hands on to get better officials.

MLB umpires obviously have access to video. Jim Joyce and the crew looked at the play immediately after the game was over. The issue is not access to video, the issue is should there be a system in place to change calls based on replay.

The reality is the average public does not know the rules they get upset about. And the commentators do not know either. I can see it now, a runner ties the throw and catch and when the play is not overturned you will hear cries for they "current" system does not work, similar to the cries you hear about from football fans when the call does not go the way they "think" it should. And the best example of this was the Super Bowl with Pittsburgh and Seattle (a family member of mine was on that team BTW). There were video that covered many of the controversial plays, but they were not reviewable.

Peace

[DG]

The commissioner is certainly capable of defining the parameters after getting feedback from Umpires, Players, and Owners. I am pretty sure Jim Joyce would welcome it, if one of those parameters was whether any close play in a perfect game was safe or out, especially the 27th.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by DG

The commissioner is certainly capable of defining the parameters after getting feedback from Umpires, Players, and Owners. I am pretty sure Jim Joyce would welcome it, if one of those parameters was whether any close play in a perfect game was safe or out, especially the 27th.

Would everyone like it if the outcome of a game was changed after the fact? What if for argument sake this play took place with a runner on 3rd and the score was 0-0? Would the outcome of the game be something we should overturn because we do not like the result? You say it like the commissioner would be the voice of reasons, when other plays have been. Remember people are upset over the other sports and their systems. I have heard people want to include Passing interference as reviewable under IR rules for the NFL. Where does it stop?

Peace

[DG]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Would everyone like it if the outcome of a game was changed after the fact? What if for argument sake this play took place with a runner on 3rd and the score was 0-0? Would the outcome of the game be something we should overturn because we do not like the result? You say it like the commissioner would be the voice of reasons, when other plays have been. Remember people are upset over the other sports and their systems. I have heard people want to include Passing interference as reviewable under IR rules for the NFL. Where does it stop?

Peace

Well let's say it was the 7th game of the World Series and game tied in bottom of the 9th with runner on 3B and this same safe call happens? Yes, the correct outcome of the game, and Series, has not been decided, review, reverse and play on. What do you think Jim Joyce would think about blowing a call that ended the World Series, with a bad call? Or the umpires, players, or owners? Who among us could sleep well for a long time after a blown call that ended the Series in error, or a perfect game?

I said, the commissioner would get feedback from umpires, players and owners, so one should assume any rule change has acceptance. Whatever that is, is where it stops.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by DG

Well let's say it was the 7th game of the World Series and game tied in bottom of the 9th with runner on 3B and this same safe call happens?

Well lets say it's the 7th game of the World Series and game tied in the bottom of the 1st with runner on 3B and the same safe call happens?

Do you review ALL safe/out calls? At any time in any game? Any one of 'em could have a influence on the game, dependant on what occurred after.

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Do you review ALL safe/out calls?

Read the title of the OP. That answers your question.

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by DG

The commissioner is certainly capable of defining the parameters ....

I'm not sure THIS commissioner is capable of anything.

[rbmartin]

Would you review if a player is actually touching 2nd base when turning a double play? If so, this would be interesting.

[TwoBits]

Read the title of the OP. That answers your question.
__________________
"Not all heroes have time to pose for sculptors...some still have papers to grade."

[TheSlav]

who could buzz down on obvious blown calls that can be fixed with minimum or no disruption.

The umps union should be OK with this, it increases jobs 25% and finds a place for the older guys to transition into retirement. Opens things up on the younger minor league guys, who need a pay bump BTW.

The dugouts will crane their necks and look upstairs rather than jaw with the field ump, maybe allowing some time and space for steam to blow off.

A 1-2 challenge per team per game system could work as well under certain circumstances. Balls / Strike No, Questec is grading umps now based on that.

Put some penalty for challenges not overturned so managers don't use them frivolously.

It's hard for me to imagine that a qualified experience ex-MLB ump in place near a replay booth couldn't have at first look, buzzed down and fixed the perfect game fiasco as well as many others.

Some will still get missed, deal with it.

Mark me down in favor of a challenge system + a fifth ump in the booth:

[greymule]

While we're at it, why not an electronic strike zone? Should a team lose the World Series on a 7th-game, 9th-inning called strike on a pitch two inches off the plate? Wouldn't be right.

The PU could still rule on foul balls, checked swings, HBP, balks, etc. (for the time being).

Olympic swimming is timed electronically. Why not sensors in the ball, the bases, the bats, the gloves? Think of the new, fun statistics this would generate: close play out, or CPO, would tabulate the number of times a guy has been out at 1B by less then 0.10 seconds, just as extremely close play out (ECPO) would tabulate the outs by less than 0.03 seconds.

"Tim, if Mike Sample were only a fifth of a second faster to 1B, he'd have 17 more hits this season."

"Thanks, Joe. Very interesting. Let's discuss this for a while."

[gumpire]

Hey guys; I'm a ASA slow-pitch softball umpire so claim no special knowledge or privilege - but I had an idea:

From what I saw on the replay of this event, it appeared that Mr. Joyce DID confer with his fellow umpires; that is what we all (umpires) should do if there is reason for us to believe we may have missed something.

Following all of that; why not make replays available to umpires to use to review a call when, and only when, THEY feel they might need that extra help?

[MrUmpire]

Wow. Selig didn't reverse the call. Instant replay was not expanded. And yet, the sun continues to rise in the east and baseball games are being played every day.

Who'd have thunk it? 99.9999999999+% of the world has moved on.