Bring in Instant Replay

I was at last night's game. Never saw a ball "off the plate" called for strike three. Perhaps you're referring to the pitch that hit the bottom of the knee, called a strike and for which Bochy decided to leave early:

Bochy ejected for arguing strike call

I agree it is terrible when umpires blow calls, but I'm not sure if i agree with bringing back IR on calls other than home runs. The pace of the game is already so **** slow. I'm not sure how many people will agree w/ me on this but i feel since the season is 162+ games the 'law of averages' and 'baseball gods' screw and help everyone out over the course of a season. It is terrible some teams could lose a single game on a bad call but I'm sure they get their fair share of calls their way throughout the season. I think the system works better in football because the overall pace of the game is faster and with the few number of games they play compared to baseball.

Jimmy: Do us a favor and tone it down a little bit...umpires do make mistakes and it's ok to admit it. The guy wasn't bashing umps, just saying if there is technology to help them then we should provide it.

The game is about the players, not the umps.

quote:

Originally posted by bsballfan:
Jimmy: Do us a favor and tone it down a little bit...umpires do make mistakes and it's ok to admit it. The guy wasn't bashing umps, just saying if there is technology to help them then we should provide it.

The game is about the players, not the umps.

Tone what down? I simply replied that I was at the game and disagreed with his interpretation. I was speaking to one specific call, not umpiring in general. Umpires make mistakes...no doubt, no denial. But I do disagree with this specific complaint and I am addressing that and that only.

No umpire I know thinks the game is about them. My personal opinion is that it is about the play.

As far as replay is concerned I did not present an opinion pro or con.

I think perhaps you "read" something I did not write. Nothing to tone down. I'm very quiet.

quote:

Originally posted by bsballfan:

The game is about the players, not the umps.

Thank you!

Regardless of the call being right or wrong, now with a player on base, the pitcher and defense went to work and took care of business. I beleive also the law of averages evens itself out as well, all teams suffer bad calls, as well as calls that often went their way as well.

The bad calls (or mistakes) sometimes makes the game more exciting (IMO) when the players do the job they are paid to do and that is sometimes to fix errors made by others.

Use it for HR purposes only. Don't take the human element of controversial calls away. The game won't be the same.

I hear coaches questioning/criticizing/2nd guessing other coaches all the time and nobody seems to take it personally, but whenever an umpire is questioned on ANYTHING it's instant go on the offensive about how coaches/players aren't perfect either, defend, blah blah blah......if you don't believe me go read through the ask the umpire section.

quote:

Originally posted by bsballfan:
I hear coaches questioning/criticizing/2nd guessing other coaches all the time and nobody seems to take it personally, but whenever an umpire is questioned on ANYTHING it's instant go on the offensive about how coaches/players aren't perfect either, defend, blah blah blah......if you don't believe me go read through the ask the umpire section.

Nothing that Jimmy said was "on the offensive."

Nor are things "on the offensive" in the umpire's section unless something ignorant is said.

whatever

Matt

Spoken like a dyed in blue umpire

TR, you have a PM

Bringing in Instant Replay is a no brainer. The problem is age.

Baseball fan, & owner demographics favor older people not young people. Most umpires at the Major League level are also older. Both groups (fans & umpires) have a stigma about technology, and for that reason it is going to be a long and drawn out process to finally get instant replay in professional baseball. Umpires should look at it as a tool to help them make the right call when needed, and not look foolish.....but they don't. They view it as a threat, and they have to get over that. Baseball needs to follow other major sports or risk becoming irrelevant.

I've said it before......Professional tennis has instant replay for its 4 grand slam events, and some of the more important tourneys. Instant replay has saved tennis from going down the toilet because the players and fans got behind instant replay. Professional tennis on both the mens and womens side is very dysfunctional, but yet they did it. That doesn't make baseball look too good.

quote:

Originally posted by fenwaysouth:
Most umpires at the Major League level are also older.

1. What do you consider as "older?"

2. Have you been keeping up with the number of new umpirs over the past four years and their ages? It appears that there will be another 3 or 4 MLB umps leaving before next season as well.

3. A survey of umpires regarding replay, while indicating a stark division, does not indicate that the division is age related.

Jimmy03

1. What do you consider as "older?" -

Older than me. ;-) 48 years old for MLB umpires. Almost all of the guys I watch on MLB package (American League mostly) appear to be older than me. Maybe they appear older because of their workload and travel schedule. It's funny, because you hear the same umpire names over and over.

2. Have you been keeping up with the number of new umpirs over the past four years and their ages? It appears that there will be another 3 or 4 MLB umps leaving before next season as well.

No I haven't kept up with that. Hopefully the new umpires will be instant replay friendly. I read Dave Phillips book "Center Field on Fire" and I realize how difficult it is to get to MLB for an umpire. I wonder how old the new umpires will be that will be replacing the retired umpires.

3. A survey of umpires regarding replay, while indicating a stark division, does not indicate that the division is age related.

That is very surprising and promising. Is there a division for the number of years of service?

Just to clarify, I would like instant replay capability for everything except balls & strike and judgement calls such as balks. This technology can help the players, coaches, umpires and fans make the game more enjoyable.

The Commissioner of MLB has been and will be talking to many this year and next about 'instant replay'.

Many baseball men have been and will be involved.
Last checked, George Will may have been the only
non 'baseball' men 'requested', sort of speak.

The Commissioner has never contacted the World Umpire Assoc, & has gone on record that he will not anytime soon. MLB has recently decided to adjust its supervisors responsible for judging umpire performance. The Commisioner has made more changes to MLB over the past 10 years than any other.
MLB attendance has averaged 10 year highs and more so than any other sport.

quote:

Originally posted by Bear:
The Commissioner of MLB has been and will be talking to many this year and next about 'instant replay'.

Many baseball men have been and will be involved.
Last checked, George Will may have been the only
non 'baseball' men 'requested', sort of speak.

The Commissioner has never contacted the World Umpire Assoc, & has gone on record that he will not anytime soon. MLB has recently decided to adjust its supervisors responsible for judging umpire performance. The Commisioner has made more changes to MLB over the past 10 years than any other.
MLB attendance has averaged 10 year highs and more so than any other sport.

Oh, where to start?

1. As late as September 22, 2010 Selig stated there would be no expansion of instant replay.

2. Accordibng to MLB, Selig did indeed discuss the matter with the WUA and, in fact, the issue is referenced in the CBA.

MLB/WOA Agreement

3. The "adjustment" in supervisors is 9 months old.

I am not advocating for or against instant replay. I won't have a say in the matter and I don't believe I'll be working MLB games if and when it comes to pass.

But I do believe that while everyone is entitled to their own opinion, they are not entitled to their own facts. The truth is easy to get to. It should be the basis of the debate, not a casualty.

quote:

Originally posted by fenwaysouth:

Just to clarify, I would like instant replay capability for everything except balls & strike and judgement calls such as balks. This technology can help the players, coaches, umpires and fans make the game more enjoyable.

Very well said.

The game is so fast now, umpires should look at replay as you describe it as "insurance". They are human. Of course they aren't going to get every call right. People would be crazy to think they would or could.

Think of it like this. Using NFL or even NCAA football as an example since they both have instant replay...How quickly do you forget a missed call from a ref that alters the turnout of a game vs a missed call that gets corrected due to replay?

I think there is a place for replay in baseball, just as fenwaysouth described it.

Ball down the line in the air and the outfielder makes a diving attempt at a catch. Ball lands just inside the foul line for a fair ball but for some reason the fielder's body blocks off the umpire to make a judgement on the fair / foul call. He calls it foul but due to instant replay it's obviously fair.

So what do you do now?
Where do you place the runner?

Due to the outfielder making a diving attempt but misses and the ball gets into the corner.

Where do you put a fast runner?
Where do you put a slow runner?
The toughie - where do you put an average runner?

Would you factor in the strength of the outfielder's arm?

Do you stop a runner short a base due to the fact Ichiro is playing RF?

Do you give a runner an extra base due to Johnny Damon playing RF (yes I know - why would you put him out there)?

Most people are seeing instant replay as a way fix a foul ball called fair - simple solution. Call it foul, reset the runners and put the hitter back at the plate. Problem solved.

Seems to me that instant replay could cause even more judgement calls by umpires.

How much complaining will happen when a runner is placed at a base the other team doesn't feel they should get?

Let's solve it by making it a standard rule that in this situation we treat it like a ground rule double and the batter gets second.

Well if I'm the offensive team's manager I'm going to be ticked if I got a really fast runner at the plate or at first who would have scored easily due to the fact the ball was kicking around the corner (I apologize for the long sentence).

(ok this one will be a stretch but could happen) if I'm the defensive manager and there is a slow runner that trips coming out of the box and probably wouldn't have made second - now the offense is being rewarded while the defense is punished - I guess we could use Kirk Gibson's homerun in '88 when he beat the A's in the World Series. He could barely walk so would it be fair to say he would have gotten easily in the situation.

We need to think things completely through before we just jump to instant replay due to a few blown calls. I know some of the situations are far fetched and not 100% realistic but it is something to think about before making a decision.

quote:

Ball down the line in the air and the outfielder makes a diving attempt at a catch. Ball lands just inside the foul line for a fair ball but for some reason the fielder's body blocks off the umpire to make a judgement on the fair / foul call. He calls it foul but due to instant replay it's obviously fair.

So what do you do now?
Where do you place the runner?

Putting the runner on base is better than him going back to bat and striking out or flying out. Turn that around and what if a runner is on third and scores but then is called back because the ump had no vision to the play and made a call based on what he had to guess as to what he saw? In the situation you describe, don't you think it would be better to give a single and allow all base runners to advance one base rather than getting nothing?

I don't think any situation will be perfect but a hit is a hit and a foul is a foul. Batters should at least get that determination.

Don't we already have established rules to address situations like the ones you describe? Do coaches go out and argue or get ticked when they have a lightning fast runner beat out a throw to first and only get awarded second when an errant throw goes into the dugout? Why couldn't fair/foul calls be addressed the same way?

I agree that it will never be perfect but I think it can at least be fair, with the technology available today.

quote:

Originally posted by 1baseballdad:

Do coaches go out and argue or get ticked when they have a lightning fast runner beat out a throw to first and only get awarded second when an errant throw goes into the dugout?

99% of the time getting second is the right call. If it the first play by an infielder, it's two bases from time of pitch.

If its the second play or first play by an outfielder it's two bases from last legally held base at the time of throw (release). Extremely rarely does a runner get to first before the release of the ball.

quote:

Originally posted by 1baseballdad:

quote:

Ball down the line in the air and the outfielder makes a diving attempt at a catch. Ball lands just inside the foul line for a fair ball but for some reason the fielder's body blocks off the umpire to make a judgement on the fair / foul call. He calls it foul but due to instant replay it's obviously fair.

So what do you do now?
Where do you place the runner?

Putting the runner on base is better than him going back to bat and striking out or flying out. Turn that around and what if a runner is on third and scores but then is called back because the ump had no vision to the play and made a call based on what he had to guess as to what he saw? In the situation you describe, don't you think it would be better to give a single and allow all base runners to advance one base rather than getting nothing?

I don't think any situation will be perfect but a hit is a hit and a foul is a foul. Batters should at least get that determination.

Don't we already have established rules to address situations like the ones you describe? Do coaches go out and argue or get ticked when they have a lightning fast runner beat out a throw to first and only get awarded second when an errant throw goes into the dugout? Why couldn't fair/foul calls be addressed the same way?

I agree that it will never be perfect but I think it can at least be fair, with the technology available today.

LOL not trying to be a jerk here but I have to totally disagree with you on this.

I don't see it as sending him back to the plate to get out - I see it as he's getting another chance. He had one chance and due to whatever he gets another chance. To me that's more fair than just arbitrairly putting him on a base due to what somebody thinks. A mistake was made and the best way to handle it is to basically have a do over by putting him back at the plate.

When you said allow all baserunners to advance one base - that all depends if I'm on offense or defense. If I'm on defense I'm probably going to be ok with just one base but if I'm on offense I'm going to be upset if I have a superfast guy on base. When you start putting runners on base due to where you think they should be then you are hurting one team over another. Fairest thing to do is to put them back at the plate and swing away.

The established rules are for balls that leave the field of play. Those are good rules because it's no longer possible to make a play on the runner. But in the situation I put above the ball never left the field of play. If the ump doesn't miss the call then there could be a long single, a stand up double, close double or a possible play at third. Once again if you just aribtrarily start placing runners where you think they should be or a set place then you are going to doing one side a disservice over the other. Fairest solution is put him back at the plate to swing away.

quote:

He calls it foul but due to instant replay it's obviously fair.

Coach,

Not sure I follow your reasoning here. Sending him back to the plate is basically the same thing as calling the ball foul rather than fair, isn't it?

In fact if the hitter had two strikes on him when that happened, it would be exactly the same thing... He goes back and hits again. Not sure how this relates to a missed call being corrected by replay.

PG I'm not saying we stick with the foul call - using replay we see that is was actually a fair ball and want to fix that missed call.

What I'm saying is that this is a missed call that can theoretically be fixed by replay. Without replay then yes the hitter goes back to the plate and has a do over. But this is a missed call so do we fix it with instant replay? If so then where do we put the runners since logic tells you that they would be on base somewhere if he didn't blow the call.

Do you now let the umpires determine where the hitter ends up if he had got the call right?

People are saying let instant replay fix missed calls and I'm asking - how do you fix a call where the ump stops action although the action should have kept going?

Using this situation......

No instant replay the batter goes back to the plate to hit.

With instant replay somebody has to determine where you're going to put runners on base.

If you just stick with using instant replay to fix foul balls that are called fair then what's the point of having replay? You're only fixing half the calls being missed.

PG I hope this is making sense because it's making my head hurt going from foul to fair this much LOL or maybe I'm not as smart as I think I am and have really butchered this example.

I think you have brought up an example of something that would be difficult to rule using replay.

I would think the only fair thing would be to give the hitter a hit and advance the baserunners a base. That would at least be an advantage to the hitting team and the hitter. Doing it over wouldn't advance any runners, put the hitter on base, or even correct the wrong call.

Then again, what would you call it... A ground rule single?

I'm not sure baseball is ready for those changes, but heck... They decided to use the All Star Game to determine home field advantage in the World Series... So anything is possible.

Makes you wonder how something that could be ruled a TIE by the commissioner one year can be so important these days. Who gets WS home field advantage the next time the All Star Game is called a tie?

quote:

Who gets WS home field advantage the next time the All Star Game is called a tie?

Indian leg wrestle?????

Honestly, I'm not 100% against instant replay but we need to realize it's not a cureall. Baseball isn't like other sports where replay can fix a call a little bit easier. Going to replay needs to be studied and investigated on how it's going to affect the flow of the game other than "how long will it delay play".

I'm truly on the fence with replay. I think it can fix a lot of blown calls but as I stated in the other posts there are situations where replay can make matters worse.

I would like to see something that limits the replays. Maybe give each manager one request, maybe two, for replay each game.

I think this would take care of big game changing calls without delaying the game. With just one replay, managers wouldn't use that up early in a game on close calls. And if they did they would lose it for later on.

I am for some form of replay, just don't know how much. I don't believe that everything evens out. What call will even out that missed perfect game? Or make up for St Louis losing the World Series?

I'm for replay because I think it would be good for umpires and good for the game. I don't think it would change the game much at all. Has it changed the game of football or tennis? If anything I think it adds another interesting element to those games. Watching the replays and talking about them is very interesting.