Instant Replay.

by shunter160 on Nov 4, 2007 11:19 AM PST

I was curious to what the people of the LL community thought about instant replay. I believe it could be used on questionable home runs. But questionable home runs happen what like 1 out of every 200 home runs. It should NOT be used for fair and foul and diving catches, because that ruins the flow of the game.

I'm torn between yes and no. I'm leaning more towards no because human error is just part of the game. And the umps don't seem to miss the call that often.

Tweet Comment 50 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Yes.

by Matthew on Nov 4, 2007 11:23 AM PST reply actions

Yes.

Human error is a stupid part of the game.

by Jeff Sullivan on Nov 4, 2007 11:28 AM PST reply actions

Without human error I hate this team even more

by Robert on Nov 4, 2007 11:31 AM PST up reply actions

Yes.

Especially on balls and strikes, if we can find a way to consistently get that right.

I agree with Jeff. Human error is a dumb part of the game. I just think it's an excuse not to hold people accountable for their mistakes.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on Nov 4, 2007 11:30 AM PST reply actions

There is no way

they could do instant replay on balls and strikes. That would slow the game down by a TON. Checking every questionable strike or ball.

Funk for '08!

by shunter160 on Nov 4, 2007 11:44 AM PST up reply actions

That's true.

But if they could FIND a way, that would be great.

Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by CapSea on Nov 4, 2007 12:49 PM PST up reply actions

I like incentives

Tie bonuses and pay raises to umpires ability to accurately call balls and strikes, and I imagine there would be fast improvement.

by MrIncognito @ Lookout Landing on Nov 4, 2007 10:08 PM PST up reply actions

I like the opposite

Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by CapSea on Nov 4, 2007 10:55 PM PST up reply actions

Unless they can make it so

IR is as fast as the umps at making a call, then no Instant Replay

Washington Highways

by Corco on Nov 4, 2007 11:45 AM PST reply actions

The only point in favor of keeping umpires at all

is "it's always been this way." And that's a retarded justification.

by Jeff Sullivan on Nov 4, 2007 11:47 AM PST reply actions

'Why does France suck?'

by Graham MacAree on Nov 4, 2007 12:04 PM PST up reply actions

I think its best application

Would be safe/out calls on the bases.

Ichiro would probably have a few extra hits, for one.

...And Colorado would have never been in the playoffs.

by Fett42 on Nov 4, 2007 12:54 PM PST reply actions

That would ruin the flow of the game

They call Holliday safe. They storm the field. Then they have to send them back because he was out. That just ruins the excitement of the game.

Strike em out throw em out to end the inning. Oh wait...he was safe. Take your base, go back out and throw to the next batter. True they get the calls right but it also ruins the flow of the game.

My choice is homerun calls in the postseason. That is it. Regular Season stays the same.

Funk for '08!

by shunter160 on Nov 4, 2007 1:19 PM PST up reply actions

you know what ruins the game more?

blown calls.

by Matthew on Nov 4, 2007 1:32 PM PST up reply actions

not really

Blown calls have been around as long as baseball umpiring has been and it appears the game has not been ruined.

by batura on Nov 5, 2007 2:54 PM PST up reply actions

That's because

blown calls are always swept under the rug.

Also, this is the Slavery/Segregation Fallacy.

by Gomez on Nov 5, 2007 3:05 PM PST up reply actions

Well

I'm not positive that slavery and balls/strikes are exactly the same. But your message has been sent.

Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by CapSea on Nov 5, 2007 7:10 PM PST up reply actions

I don't think that's a very good argument.

by Jeff Sullivan on Nov 5, 2007 3:20 PM PST up reply actions

Its no differant than

A big play being overturned in football after a catch or call is reviewed.

by Fett42 on Nov 4, 2007 2:22 PM PST up reply actions

Seahawks superbowl

That was an atrocity.

Willie is ours, and you can't have him

by spittle8 on Nov 5, 2007 2:10 PM PST up reply actions

If the game had been in San Diego

and the call was overturned you would've seen some excitement.

Honestly though what's more important? "Excitement" or properly rewarding the team that made the play? I guess it comes down to whether you view sports primarily as entertainment or as a competition.

by ningwers on Nov 5, 2007 5:48 AM PST up reply actions

If the game was in San Diego

Then it wouldn't have been a walkoff and would have been easier to overturn.

by Robert on Nov 5, 2007 8:58 AM PST up reply actions

Exactly

"Excitement" is subjective. I think it's dumb to point out a single play and claim that it's too exciting to review when the same play under slightly different circumstances/venue/etc is now unexciting enough to consider reviewing.

This is also pretty silly because how often are walk-off plays actually close enough worry about reviewing? A homerun 10 rows back or a double into the gap driving in a standup run will still have the same level of drama that it always has. Most of us simply support some sort of review when the play is so close that the umpire has a very high chance of getting it wrong. In those situations I'd rather have the players decide who wins, not the umpiring crew.

by ningwers on Nov 5, 2007 9:37 AM PST up reply actions

HUMAN ERROR HURTS THIS TEAM

BY PLAGUING US 162 DAYS OF THE YEAR!!!11!!1

by yourfacemakesmewail on Nov 4, 2007 1:22 PM PST reply actions

I am not a fan of the US-Russian sea border

Washington Highways

by Corco on Nov 4, 2007 1:58 PM PST up reply actions

[deleted, wrong thread]

Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by CapSea on Nov 4, 2007 2:11 PM PST up reply actions

dammit

you're right

Washington Highways

by Corco on Nov 4, 2007 2:15 PM PST up reply actions

Hard to break the habit

Once you tasted the sweet dark marrow of the non-sequitur, you'll never go back.

by johnbai on Nov 4, 2007 3:29 PM PST up reply actions

Return Questec and do instant replay

Umps have massive egos and I even think it goes as far as to affect the outcome as games, but even sans that they make too many bad calls that swing games.

Close calls that can go either way can be overlooked, but umps need to be corrected on clearly bad calls. Let the players on the field decide games. Give teams 2-3 challenges like in football if you're worried about holding the game up.

by Gomez on Nov 4, 2007 2:53 PM PST reply actions

DMZ's book has a big section

on Umpires and how they can be influenced too heavily by one coach or a superstar talent. Even if the advantage isn't shown immediately, it can be shown later in a second call going favorably instead of being ruled what it should be.

As a former umpire myself who's blown a call or two, I have no problem getting things right. I can't remember how many times I called for assistence from a third base umpire on a check swing, but I do know that the one time I didn't ask for help, the games outcome was determined by my call. I watched a video later and I blew it, and I felt horrible about it for a while.

Ego? Human element? Shouldn't have any place in people whose sole job is to enforce the rules.

I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not...

by TIF @ Lookout Landing on Nov 4, 2007 5:09 PM PST reply actions

About replay tho

The concerns about causing games to drag is a valid one. Football had this problem for years and their solution was (inevitably) to limit the amount of challenges that can be made. They turned into a gambling system where you lose one of your precious timeouts if you're wrong.

Perhaps what we can do is take it out of the coaches and umpires hands entirely. There's enough cameras around major league ballparks and enough people up in booths doing replays and whatnot that they can call for the review from upstairs instead, much like the NFL does inside of the two miute warning.

Because a penalty system for reviews just isn't feasible in baseball. What do you penalize for the team being wrong? Outs? Runs? Would we only allow one or two challenges per game for each team?

Just not sure it would work the same way as football's.

I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not...

by TIF @ Lookout Landing on Nov 4, 2007 5:18 PM PST reply actions

A trip to the mound?

I'm not sure there needs to be a penalty sat all.

I think the coaches have to have some sort of control in order to beep it unbiased.

"Goddamn Romans. Sure know how to make a ... drum room." --Matt Cameron

by JI on Nov 4, 2007 7:38 PM PST up reply actions

I thought somewhere along that lines too.

Like having to change your pitcher? A trip to the mound isn't severe enough, and being forced to make a pitching change has its obvious flaws too. Having your next hitter start with an 0-1 count, maybe? But even that would have the purists howling, and I imagine most people wouldn't completely like how it alters the score book. Including myself.

I really don't know how you would do it.

Refuse to progress!!

by Double06 on Nov 4, 2007 7:54 PM PST up reply actions

Why put a penalty in place at all?

You can say you get 2-3 chances to question a call. If you blow your wad on silly challenges in the first 5-6 innings, and then a questionable call goes against you in the 9th, tough.

by Gomez on Nov 4, 2007 10:13 PM PST up reply actions

I don't even like the idea of limiting challenges

by Jeff Sullivan on Nov 4, 2007 10:15 PM PST up reply actions

It would be abused.

Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by CapSea on Nov 4, 2007 10:54 PM PST up reply actions

I wouldn't either

but I can see the stoppages getting out of control, especially with belligerents like Scoiscia and Ozzie involved.

by Gomez on Nov 5, 2007 12:29 PM PST up reply actions

Unbiased?

The NFL doesn't have a problem with bias during the 2 minute "upstairs" replay calls. Just make sure the dudes in the booth are MLB officials.

I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not...

by TIF @ Lookout Landing on Nov 4, 2007 11:19 PM PST up reply actions

An idea

Baseballs with some sort of electronic transmitter inside, a counterpart beneath the plate that measures the ball's position as it crosses the plate (if applicable). A chime would go off in the ump's earpiece if its a strike or whatever, thus the officiating crew could keep their jobs and save face while getting calls correct.

Thoughts?

by hcoguy on Nov 4, 2007 5:31 PM PST reply actions

Interesting.

However, I don't know how it would contribute to low or high calls unless there are chip implants on the hitter's uniforms. But in any case, balls and strike calls aren't as important as out or home run calls. I think I'd be willing to leave those to the umpires if it meant crawling before walking and running.

Refuse to progress!!

by Double06 on Nov 4, 2007 6:50 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah, hard to measure that

but I would argue that balls and strikes are more important. THere are extremely few controversial catches and homeruns. A non-called strike on Big Papi that leads to another chance of him hitting a homer 20 rows deep which is a more common situation than a ball hitting a yellow line in some park with odd grounds rules.

I believe a consistent strike zone is the most important factor in the game that is outside player control. There may still be a few borderline ones that get called differently, but something electronic needs to be done to stop blatant superstar zones and rookie hazing. Remember Feierabend against Adam Dunn?

Anyways, I just had a crazier idea. The borders of the plate are lined with some sort of projection machine that puts up a 3d strike zone proportionate to the batter, the home ump wears special glasses that reflect the zone which is in a spectrum that is not visible to the naked eye. That's right, I want frickin umps with frickin lasers attached to their heads.

I am partially drunk and it is not going to happen but would be really cool to see. Hecklers could yell "Is your infrared equipment malfunctioning!?!" instead of "Are you blind!?!"

by hcoguy on Nov 4, 2007 7:49 PM PST up reply actions

Maybe put them in at the letters and knees

and have a reader to the left/right of home plate.

I can't imagine the technology is infeasible.

by Gomez on Nov 5, 2007 12:29 PM PST up reply actions

Only for questionable home runs, diving catches,

and the occasional iffy infield play at the plate/tie goes to runner situations. The human error aspect of the game sucks at times, but is always there, and just as capable as helping one day as hurting the next. Limit the teams to 2 or so, and only to be called on the infield stuff. Leave the diving catches and homerun calls to umpire discretion/booth discretion, like within the 2 minute warning and OT in football. A blown strike call or check swing is similar to an NFL Ref not calling a hold on a player. It's too circumstantial

HA HA HA, your Grandpa's an ASS!- Tourette's Guy (R.I.P)

by tootthekazoo on Nov 4, 2007 6:18 PM PST reply actions

Never on balls and strikes

Here's where I'd use instant replay:

- Home run calls
- Stolen base attempts
- Close running plays at home (and ONLY at home)

I would limit managerial challenges to two per game, with one exception - once a game, a manager can also challenge a double play if he thinks there was a phantom tag at second.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Nov 4, 2007 9:05 PM PST reply actions

I wouldn't mind strike outs

or ball 4's. It's the standard strike I don't care about.

Jose Vidro (DH - Ms) was arrested today in an Idaho Bathroom for having a wide stance and sucking.

by CapSea on Nov 4, 2007 10:54 PM PST up reply actions

I care more about balls/strikes

Than any other part of the game.

by Graham MacAree on Nov 5, 2007 1:04 AM PST up reply actions

That's too damn complicated

I realize the NFL has their stuff aginast overruling judgement calls, but there are very good reasons for most of those.

Baseball has none of them, so let everything being reviewable.

I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not make jokes in my sig. I will not...

by TIF @ Lookout Landing on Nov 4, 2007 11:21 PM PST up reply actions

Pass.

The only way I would support this is of they allocated one or two "challenges" a game, and not on balls and strikes.

I'm never blocking a fire exit.

by Thingray on Nov 5, 2007 2:13 PM PST reply actions

GM's voted for use of IR on HR calls

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3096923

by Robert on Nov 6, 2007 10:30 AM PST reply actions

sweet

I take issue with this though, "I don't like instant replay because I don't like all the delays. I think it sometimes creates as many problems or more than it solves," Selig said then.

The problem is, on a close call like that, the opposing manager tends to come out and waste 3-5 minutes arguing anyways. You might as well take 1 minute, get the call right and not have the argument.

by Matthew on Nov 6, 2007 12:03 PM PST up reply actions