Why No Replay Review?

[CraigD]

With all the talk about replays these days, why was there no replay review on the Cano HR to right?

Was it that obvious that the fans didn't interfere with Cruz as they reached inside the line of the wall and made contact with his glove? Or is the replay not intended for that type of verification of a HR?

They did use replay review on the next batter to overturn the HR ruling.

[umpjim]

I'm not convinced Berkman's shot didn't hit the foulpole. The TV replay has the ball doing some kind of jink at the point it passes the pole. Why a ball obviously outside the pole would be called fair and a HR by the RF ump means he saw some deflection. What they saw on the video to reverse it would be interesting to see.

[Nevadaref]

There is no defense for the crew not using the video replay to look at the HR with the possible fan interference.
It is an embarrassment to officiating that they didn't and consequently didn't get this play right in the postseason. ESPN has shown conclusive proof that the fan reached over the wall into the playing area.
If they aren't going to use it, then why have the rule in place?

[GoodwillRef]

Like using the reply monitor in NCAA basketball MLB needs to put down some guidelines to when they may us the replay and when they must use the replay...in this situation you have 6 guys and nobody says "lets go take a look at this!"

[GoodwillRef]

The picture of the HR in the USA Today shows the fans reaching over the wall and Cruz's glove in the field of play.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

The picture of the HR in the USA Today shows the fans reaching over the wall and Cruz's glove in the field of play.

OK. So? By itself that doesn't constitute spectator interference. Where's the ball?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It is an embarrassment to officiating that they didn't and consequently didn't get this play right in the postseason. ESPN has shown conclusive proof that the fan reached over the wall into the playing area.
If they aren't going to use it, then why have the rule in place?

On what basis are you making this claim? I've got the ball clearly over the stands when there's contact with the fielder's glove. That's not INT. Hell, if the ball is over the stands, the fans can rip it out of the fielder's glove, and it still wouldn't be INT.

Naturally, the commentators threw out a bunch of red herrings: "fans reached out over the field of play," "definitely could have made a play on the ball," blah blah blah. Not INT.

Here's the video:
Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | ALCS Gm 4: Cano homers over a leaping Cruz - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I've got the ball clearly over the stands when there's contact with the fielder's glove. That's not INT. Hell, if the ball is over the stands, the fans can rip it out of the fielder's glove, and it still wouldn't be INT.


Here's the video:
Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | ALCS Gm 4: Cano homers over a leaping Cruz - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

And that's exactly what the replay video shows also. Every single time, too.

Later on in the game, Brett Gardner reached into the stands trying to catch a foul ball and a fan knocked it away from him. Same kinda play. Does the name "Bartman" ring a bell?

[MD Longhorn]

So let me get this straight... you expected the UMPIRES to make a ruling, and then on their own decide they might be wrong and go to replay? Coaches didn't complain or ask them to confer - so why would they? Blaming the umpires for not going to replay is frankly idiotic.