Detroit @ Boston foul tip that wasn't call...

[Dakota]

Not here to rag on the umpire, but rather wondering about the replay implications.

Should this / could this kind of call be overturned by a "reasonable" replay system for MLB?

The replay video was clear enough. I just wonder whether this kind of play is in the discussion for an eventual expansion of the replay system.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Should this / could this kind of call be overturned by a "reasonable" replay system for MLB?

No.

MLB currently has a reasonable replay system. No reasonable replay system for baseball would allow fixing this.

[D Ray]

MLB.com Must C | Must C Curious: Tigers believe Aviles strikes out - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

Agreed, replay of this play and others like it is not "reasonable" IMHO. Replay in MLB really feels like a slippery slope, there is no end to what COULD be replayed and subsequently overturned. Not a fan of replay in MLB (or any baseball) period.

[Welpe]

I agree, D Ray. In other sports it is fairly easy to draw a clear line where replay should and should not be used. With baseball I just don't see that beyond what they have now.

[REFANDUMP]

I would like to think that baseball wouldn't need to go the route of instant replay, but am becoming convinced that is highly unlikely. There are too many blatently blown calls and at some point this will become unacceptable to those in the game (players, managers, team owners, fans). If these guys are supposed to be the best in the business, than I guess I really suck !!!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mbyron

No.

MLB currently has a reasonable replay system. No reasonable replay system for baseball would allow fixing this.

It is reasonable if you want to review every single close call. But that would add a lot of unnecessary time to games and would become a big problem. People already complain about what is reviewed in football and even basketball recently and you think baseball with no timing to their game not be criticized for such a system that added 30 more minutes to games? I just hope they implement this so everyone can see how tedious this would be and get rid of it for ruining the game. But we all can wish can't we?

Peace

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by REFANDUMP

than I guess I really suck !!!

Or maybe you've blown more than you think but don't have ESPN replaying it 50 times in an evening.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by REFANDUMP

...There are too many blatently blown calls...

Many of them are blatant only because of the extensive camera coverage already in place. The foul tip / foul ball call in question would have remained a dispute between Laird and Welke were it not for the multiple camera angles resulting in just the right view of the play. Leyland's ejection and post game rant would not have happened had he not had access to the replay.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by mbyron

No.

MLB currently has a reasonable replay system. No reasonable replay system for baseball would allow fixing this.

I'm not a huge proponent of replay ... but this seems like one of the calls that would not disrupt the game if it were an allowable correctable error.

I'm vastly against the whole... "let's take the crew into the back room" replay nonsense. But if there was a replay official SOMEwhere that could simply call down to the umpire on a call like this, it would be non-disruptive and would fix egregious errors like this one.

[Dakota]

I am very much opposed to using replay in MLB, even what they have now. But, then, I'm a curmudgeonly old traditionalist. I also recognize that in today's game with all of the cameras showing replays to the fans, my position is untenable. Expanded replay will be here, if not next year, soon.

It could be greatly expanded to include any call that the current umpiring crew would conference over if it was done with a replay umpire ("RU") that was treated like another member of the crew, who would merely give information to the crew chief through an earpiece.

No one in the on-field crew would actually view the video; the crew chief could decide to use the information provided by RU, or ignore it. If he uses it, it would be done the same as any other umpire conference. The crew would get together and discuss RU's information. As with current umpire conferences, there would be no viewing of replays; only discussing the additional information. The call would be either upheld or overturned based on the conference, the same as it is done now.

[D Ray]

Not to pick a nit, but which errors are the egregious ones? Seems like the team that gets the smelly end of the stick would have an argument using egregious as the standard.

Video used as an instructional tool is a wonderful teaching aid. Video used to "correct an error" is a slippery slope. Where does it end? I am not suggesting that the clock get turned back to the days of one umpire for the whole field (unless he is equipped with a monitor ), but we need to let these guys umpire. They should be working hard because this is their chosen profession and they have a passion for the craft, not because they are trying to be as good as the eye in the sky.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I'm not a huge proponent of replay ... but this seems like one of the calls that would not disrupt the game if it were an allowable correctable error.

I'm vastly against the whole... "let's take the crew into the back room" replay nonsense. But if there was a replay official SOMEwhere that could simply call down to the umpire on a call like this, it would be non-disruptive and would fix egregious errors like this one.

Mike, you're thinking only of how bad the call is, and how much it merits reversing. You're not thinking about how impossible it would be to fix the vast majority of these situations.

This one was called foul with no runners moving. But what if R1 had been running? When you fix it, it will be a foul tip and a live ball. Are you going to send R1 back to 1B and screw the offense or send him to 2B and screw the defense?

The umpires might miss one now and again, but IMO fixing most of them would be impossible without introducing more controversy than the original error.

[jwwashburn]

Did I miss someone asking why the heck the 1B umpire called a foul ball here?

I would rather the HPU look at the ball and see no dirt than have this happen. (not that that is a good policy, either)

I do not want replay on this...it already happens too often. Why can't they just modify some of the ridiculous outfield fences? That makes more sense than three umpires going to have a soda...errr looking at the replay.

[kape]

Originally Posted by mbyron

This one was called foul with no runners moving. But what if R1 had been running?

To me, this is the problem with replay in baseball. So much hinges on what has happened immediately before that I am fine with living with the bad calls. Once umpires start placing runners it begins to resemble a board game.

You might say, Well, reserve replay for the boundary calls or for when there are no runners on base. Why should baseball fix some umpiring errors but not others? I say, live with them all.

[David B]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Mike, you're thinking only of how bad the call is, and how much it merits reversing. You're not thinking about how impossible it would be to fix the vast majority of these situations.

This one was called foul with no runners moving. But what if R1 had been running? When you fix it, it will be a foul tip and a live ball. Are you going to send R1 back to 1B and screw the offense or send him to 2B and screw the defense?

The umpires might miss one now and again, but IMO fixing most of them would be impossible without introducing more controversy than the original error.

I concur - its' just not possible without disrupting the game. In baseball more than any other sport, calls made on the field dictate what the offense or defense does or does not do.

This play is just one of many, many examples where it just don't work in baseball.

Thanks
David