Incorrect call on replay review in Cleveland

[tmagan]

On a double in Cleveland in the ninth which was reviewed, it was kept a double instead of changed to a home run when the ball clearly hit the railing, which is why I ask... like the NHL, why doesn't MLB and the NFL have reviews conducted in New York, which makes all the sense in the world.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by tmagan

On a double in Cleveland in the ninth which was reviewed, it was kept a double instead of changed to a home run when the ball clearly hit the railing, which is why I ask... like the NHL, why doesn't MLB and the NFL have reviews conducted in New York, which makes all the sense in the world.

Angel Hernandez is an idiot, and leave it at that.

[David B]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Angel Hernandez is an idiot, and leave it at that.

Agree with that and shows that instant replay is NOT the answer that everyone thought it would be.

Thanks
David

[bbsbvb83]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Angel Hernandez is an idiot, and leave it at that.

And when did he start wearing an adjustable hat?

[TwoBits]

I wish I knew what Hernandez saw. We will never know, because (From Fox News):

Hernandez compounded his gaffe by the way he handled it. According to Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle, Hernandez didn’t allow the media to record his postgame comments. While stipulating that his answers be written in print only, Hernandez said the umpires “didn’t have enough evidence to reverse (the) call,” Slusser reported.

I predict more changes in MLB's replay policy next year.

[SE Minnestoa Re]

Anytime Angel or CB Buckner are involved, chaos is prevelant.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

I wish I knew what Hernandez saw. We will never know, because (From Fox News):

Hernandez compounded his gaffe by the way he handled it. According to Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle, Hernandez didn’t allow the media to record his postgame comments. While stipulating that his answers be written in print only, Hernandez said the umpires “didn’t have enough evidence to reverse (the) call,” Slusser reported.

I predict more changes in MLB's replay policy next year.

Sounds like he made a point of blaming the "TV" they had. I guess it was an old black and white with rabbit ears.

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Sounds like he made a point of blaming the "TV" they had. I guess it was an old black and white with rabbit ears.

I picture them all looking at the replay on their individual I-phones.

[jwwashburn]

Hmmmm, I did notice it was raining.

I am SURE that the rain has nothing to do with Angel's decision.

[Ref'sProudPapa]

I saw a documentary once (not about replay) that showed an actual replay review in Fenway park. It was a single screen in the hallway leading from the home dugout to the locker rooms, just in the middle of the wall. One umpire stays on the field. One umpire stays in the hallway keeping away cameras and players and team reps, so only two actually do the review -- presumably the crew chief and whomever's call it was if those are different people.

The tv was kept in one of those metal boxes on the wall like your electrical panel. The screen was about the size of one of those dvd screens on the back of a car seat in a mini-van.

The NHL system seems to work pretty well and the set up in Toronto is impressive. But I guess one difference is that NHL arenas don't have ground rules and all playing areas are uniform. Whether or not the puck crossed the line, or was kicked in, is the same in Phoenix as it is in Winnipeg, except for maybe slight camera placement differences. MLB crews each series go over pretty carefully the ground rules of each stadium and have them in mind when they are doing reviews. They are also there, live, in the park, and so can see things that might not be apparent on tv -- for example how deep a gap is between a fence and the stands. Also, on any given night in the NHL, Toronto will be called upon for at least a couple of reviews. You can go weeks in MLB without a review. Having a war room, with a dedicated crew versed in the ground rules of 30 stadiums seems a bit infeasible. I guess I'm leaning toward centralized review if the alternative is that crazy procedure I saw in the Fenway documentary. But, to go along the lines of the OP's question, I don't think centralized review is as obvious in baseball as it seems.

One thing I'd add is that we all seem to take as granted -- largely from the NFL experience -- that the call in the field have primacy unless the video evidence is overwhelming, and from Hernandez's supposed comments yesterday that seems to be the rule in baseball as well. Everyone acts like this is an obviously correct method of using video. I disagree. Once you make the decision to go to video, go to video. If video is not adequate to make a call, that's one thing. But if you have the tape, forget what happened on the field, and make your call based on the video just like you make your call on the field. If you are truly in equipoise after seeing the video, fine, the tie goes to the call on the field. But the circumstances in which reviewers and the league think this should be the case seem to be a very significant band, not a very narrow one, as I think should be the case.

[Tim C]

If what I am going to say is old news I apologize.

For about 20 years MLB has had a room in New York that is manned by at least two people when any game is being played in the leagues.

These people are "rules experts" that are available by phone to answer questions (note: not make rulings) if any umpire calls their number during a game.

The room is like what you would expect -- hi def monitors carrying all games and multiple coverages of all plays.

So we are not reaching very far to have this room to have a couple of professional umpires reviewing plays.

I HATE replay but if available why not use it.

T

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by Tim C

If what I am going to say is old news I apologize.

For about 20 years MLB has had a room in New York that is manned by at least two people when any game is being played in the leagues.

These people are "rules experts" that are available by phone to answer questions (note: not make rulings) if any umpire calls their number during a game.

The room is like what you would expect -- hi def monitors carrying all games and multiple coverages of all plays.

So we are not reaching very far to have this room to have a couple of professional umpires reviewing plays.

I HATE replay but if available why not use it.

T

I've seen worse. Doug Eddings refused to go to instant replay on a ball that was obviously a home run to everybody in the stadium but him.

I don't remember who is the head of umpires (retired, but I cannot remember who it was) said the replay people could have put a yellow circle around the ball showing where the ball hit. They simply had to ask for it.

[RPatrino]

Originally Posted by Tim C

If what I am going to say is old news I apologize.

For about 20 years MLB has had a room in New York that is manned by at least two people when any game is being played in the leagues.

These people are "rules experts" that are available by phone to answer questions (note: not make rulings) if any umpire calls their number during a game.

The room is like what you would expect -- hi def monitors carrying all games and multiple coverages of all plays.

So we are not reaching very far to have this room to have a couple of professional umpires reviewing plays.



I HATE replay but if available why not use it.

T

T do you happen to have that number handy? I have few questions for them.

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

T do you happen to have that number handy? I have few questions for them.

Is that the same number they called when the other crew goofed the pitching rules? The PU got on the horn with someone, from the dugout phone. So that's a least five know-it-alls that contributed to that one.