Interesting review situation

Jays base runner is initially called safe resulting in a force situation at home. The Jays request a review which results in the base runner being called out, nullifying the force and allowing a different runner to score. (sorry, I don't know the terminology for different runners)

MLB.com -- Blue Jays vs. Athletics | 7.3.2014

[bwburke94]

CloseCallSports post:

MLB Instant Replay Review 649: Vic Carapazza (07) | Close Call Sports & Umpire Ejection Fantasy League

[jicecone]

I am not so sure what seems to be the problem here. Everyone screamed for replay for years and now that the correct call is made with the use of replay ?????

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by jicecone

I am not so sure what seems to be the problem here. Everyone screamed for replay for years and now that the correct call is made with the use of replay ?????

I agree. Without IR, the play stands (unless after the umpires get together, U2 informs U1 he saw a tag, and the call gets reversed), and the pundits scream and cry how Toronto got jobbed and we need IR. With IR, the call was eventually made right, which is the whole purpose of IR.

I suppose one could argue that Oakland got jobbed by U1's initial call of Safe. And you really can't counter that the catcher should have tagged R3 coming home, because he had no reason to with the way things initially played out. No player is taught to tag a runner on a force play, just in case. And if the A's had lost by a run and the protest had gone through, I seriously doubt the MLB suits would have overturned the scoring of the run.

Sorry, but dems da breaks. Heads up call by the Jays manager on this one.

[JRutledge]

And this is the overall problem with replay in baseball. You make a ruling in one aspect of the game, it is nearly impossible to do something else with how the play results unless players anticipate a possible review. This is what they wanted, not live with the result.

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And this is the overall problem with replay in baseball. You make a ruling in one aspect of the game, it is nearly impossible to do something else with how the play results unless players anticipate a possible review. This is what they wanted, not live with the result.

Does this mean players need to change what they would do because of possible replay? Like P2 tagging the running instead of just applying the force? Or is it just a consequence that they will live with cuz it happens so rarely?

[ozzy6900]

At first, I thought that U1 was signaling no interference, not no tag. But obviously, he made and incorrect call.

As far as the meeting, it is also obvious that U2 had the tag on the BR. The entire question now is R3 scoring because F2 reacted to the safe call of U1. Sorry, son, that's baseball. Yeah, F2 reacted to the call and F2 could have swung around and popped a tag but he didn't. Do I agree with the protest? No, it was a judgement call by U1 and should not be protestable (in my opinion).

All I can say is IR didn't help this situation at all.