Should Baseball have a replay system?

[Bellsprout]

Re: SHOULD BASEBALL HAVE A REPLAY SYSTEM?......

http://deadspin.com/5907145/tim-welk...-pathetic-joke

Human error! It's what makes the game great!

Spoiler

I'm now using italics as my sarcasm font. I think it works well.

[rspencer86]

Re: SHOULD BASEBALL HAVE A REPLAY SYSTEM?......

Perfect Zero (and others) have hit the nail on the head on this one. Challenge systems are stupid and take WAY more time than they should. Simply have an extra umpire who reviews EVERY play and buzzes the crew chief if a call needs to be corrected.

I'm even fine with an electronic strike zone. I don't watch baseball to see guys get walks on pitches that were clearly in the zone, or guys get rung up on pitches that are a foot off the plate. Sure, the umps do an outstanding job for the most part. But why not use technology to improve how things are done, like every other company in the entire world has?

Look at that call linked above. That should never happen. Ever.

[Ed26]

Re: SHOULD BASEBALL HAVE A REPLAY SYSTEM?......

Perfect Zero (and others) have hit the nail on the head on this one. Challenge systems are stupid and take WAY more time than they should. Simply have an extra umpire who reviews EVERY play and buzzes the crew chief if a call needs to be corrected.

This^^^^^^^^^

but i disagree on the E-Stike Zone because a lot of time knowing how the ump is calling the game can separate an average P from a great P.

[Hooe]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

Didn't the MLB at one point used to have an electronic strike zone that, while not used to call the game, was used to evaluate umpire performance? For that matter, what sort of technology do TV broadcasts use to show where pitches hit the strike zone?

Also, the play from that Deadspin link is maddening. Imagine if a play like that ended a Championship Series or World Series. Maybe then baseball would join the rest of the world with regard to the idea of forward thinking.

[snepp]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

Didn't the MLB at one point used to have an electronic strike zone that, while not used to call the game, was used to evaluate umpire performance?

Questec. They really screwed the pooch with this one by not installing it in every stadium at the same time. Umpires knew which stadiums it was in and modified how they called the games to match.

For that matter, what sort of technology do TV broadcasts use to show where pitches hit the strike zone?

It's pretty much all based upon Pitchf/x at this point.

[Blzer]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

The Red Sox are reviewing a home run right now (the play just stood), but where is their normal angle down the Green Monster that they use?

Anyway, I thought I'd give my opinion on replay. I think it's time for a change. I do think there is a time and place for replay, but exactly with that... there is a time and a place:

- It shall not be on what are considered to be "judgment calls," i.e. plays that can't go through an appeal process with another umpire.

- The ultimate decision is not up to any umpires on the field, nor would they leave the field to view the replay. There would be an umpire upstairs who would look at the play (still thinking about how it should be "looked at" though), and be the arbiter in this case.

- Only an umpire can ask for it, not a manager. Obviously a manager can make the request, but they can't just "throw the flag" so to speak and automatically make them look at it.

The thing is, I want to see the umpires claim a bit more responsibility and not eject managers for getting a call wrong and not being able to do anything by looking back at it. However, at the same time, we need a threshold. Where does it stop? We can't have them look back at balls versus strikes all of the time, or close plays at first. It's not about "slowing the game down," it's about it being ridiculous that we would be so reliant (umpires too) on a foolproof system. It would make umpires lazier in the end, and managers would use this as a crutch far too often, perhaps even to keep their pitcher warming up longer in the pen or something.

So, what does this mean it can be called on?

- Pulled foot
- Check swing
- Tag up
- Missed bag
- Fair/foul (iffy, because it's only if an umpire would normally defer to another umpire if they thought someone else had a better view)
- Trap (includes ball in dirt in front of catcher)
- Catch/bobble/transfer

Notice how I didn't say fair/foul or home runs. As for fair/foul, I omitted it for two reasons: 1) it's an iffy one because an umpire wouldn't normally defer to another umpire, even if they thought someone else had a better view; 2) calling it foul immediately makes it irreversible, and we can't just call all of them fair to begin with. As for home runs, I think all of them should be reviewed (including fair/foul home runs).

This isn't the NFL where there's a limit of coaching challenges, so you can't just keep this thing rolling like there's no tomorrow. I honestly think an overruling arbiter should get as many angles as he likes, but only one look each time and at one speed. If he can't overturn the call by those, then it frankly shouldn't be overturned. Move on.

I'm not about the "human aspect" of the game, and frankly I hate when umpires mess up calls... but we thrive on seeing when our teams catch a break every so often. Umpire expands the strike zone for your pitcher and gets a payoff pitch punch-out? Would you really like it if there was a system that said, "No no, that was a ball. Stay in the box." No. We would not like that. We believe in breaks when they are for our team, and many games wouldn't be the way they turned out, for better or worse, if it weren't for breaks. It makes the game interesting when calls become a dice roll, and sometimes there just isn't any going back.

That's why the only calls that should be "challenged" are the ones which they would normally ask for help with anyway, because they were so busy trying to make a judgment call. If they are still having trouble with it, then they defer to the arbiter. After that, let it go and move on.

Yeah, we have the technology or whatever you want to say... but if we do, why don't I see all stadiums have cameras right down their lines? And in fact, why don't they all have cameras looking straight up their foul poles? That would be the most definitive angle as to where it went over the fence. We're not even using all of the technology that we could.

In the end, I just want to see less ejections. I made the case in another thread after that Aviles strikeout, but if an umpire ever misses a call and ejects a manager because of it, they should have to face some sort of consequence, even if it's simply apologizing to the manager the next day. I still need them to focus on their jobs. It's like giving students calculators for a test and they even use them for 8 * 0. We certainly want to see calls be correct, but let's make this black and white and let's let "judgment" remain as "judgment."

By the way, what does it mean by "You can't argue a balk"? I know what a balk is haha, but why is that more special than, say, arguing a play at first?

[Marino]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

[BatsareBugs]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

Look who's popular indeed.

[Blzer]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

Too lazy.

Didn't copy-paste.

Haha just read the bold. The rest is clarification/justification.

[sydrogerdavid]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

Okay, I think I've come around to instant replay now. This year's umping has been the worst in my baseball memory.

But I want to try it out in Spring Training first. If MLB tried it out in Spring Training, it would give them time to iron out the problems and give players, coaches, umps, and fans all the time they need to adjust to something new. That's the real problem. Baseball is always opposed and afraid to anything new.

[lonewolf371]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

Okay, I think I've come around to instant replay now. This year's umping has been the worst in my baseball memory.

But I want to try it out in Spring Training first. If MLB tried it out in Spring Training, it would give them time to iron out the problems and give players, coaches, umps, and fans all the time they need to adjust to something new. That's the real problem. Baseball is always opposed and afraid to anything new.

The last sentence is part of why I like the sport. Sometimes it seems like it's the only major sport I can easily recognize year after year.

Also, due to the lack of change, it's the only sport where you can sit down and compare today's players to players of the past. I like that.

[Sportsforever]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

I understand the clamor for instant replay, but I have YET to hear anyone explain for me how it can work for baseball. For example, in the 2009 playoffs when Mauer hit the ball down the left field line and it was ruled "foul" when it was really fair by several inches, how do you resolve that? Let's say they review it and rule it fair, how far do they advance the runners? How far does Mauer get to advance (could he have stretched it to a double?)

Obviously one option would be to tell umps everything even close is "fair" and you play it out and review it...if it was foul you just go back and continue play as if it was a foul ball. Does anyone really want that?

At the end of the day I think it's hard to implement smoothly into baseball and the last thing baseball needs is something else slowing it's pace down...but this is coming from someone who HATES replay in football and I realize I'm probably in the minority.

[Blzer]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

I understand the clamor for instant replay, but I have YET to hear anyone explain for me how it can work for baseball. For example, in the 2009 playoffs when Mauer hit the ball down the left field line and it was ruled "foul" when it was really fair by several inches, how do you resolve that? Let's say they review it and rule it fair, how far do they advance the runners? How far does Mauer get to advance (could he have stretched it to a double?)

Obviously one option would be to tell umps everything even close is "fair" and you play it out and review it...if it was foul you just go back and continue play as if it was a foul ball. Does anyone really want that?

At the end of the day I think it's hard to implement smoothly into baseball and the last thing baseball needs is something else slowing it's pace down...but this is coming from someone who HATES replay in football and I realize I'm probably in the minority.

This is exactly the problem. This happens in football as well, so you have to ask yourself if they're doing it right as well. Incomplete pass or fumble, player stepping out of bounds, down vs. not down, etc.

Basically, the rule of umpiring is when in doubt, make the "non-call." If you don't see a strike, it's a ball; don't see a foul, it's fair; don't see an out, call safe. It should already be like this, and the good news is that if umpires ended up actually calling games like this, we can let the replay system take care of the rest... well, only fair/foul in this case.

But yes, once the ball is called foul, you can't change anything (or so I believe). Maybe they can institute some system where they can at least place the batter-runner on first base, if not second base... but give the defense the benefit of the doubt and hold runners back whenever possible.

[SPTO]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

Here's my take, instant replay should only be used for fair/foul balls in regards to HRs and calls on the bag. (whether stealing or a guy sliding into a base on a base hit etc etc) I've seen way too many instances where an umpire is completely out of the play and he makes a call that would only be believable if he was in the right position.

The implementation would be pretty easy with the HR calls but not sure how you'd set it up with safe/out calls. I guess a manager could go up to the crew chief and ask for a replay or something like that.

[ImTellinTim]

Re: Should Baseball have a replay system?

I understand the clamor for instant replay, but I have YET to hear anyone explain for me how it can work for baseball. For example, in the 2009 playoffs when Mauer hit the ball down the left field line and it was ruled "foul" when it was really fair by several inches, how do you resolve that? Let's say they review it and rule it fair, how far do they advance the runners? How far does Mauer get to advance (could he have stretched it to a double?)

Joe Mauer situation was brought up earlier in the thread.

There is the argument that the players wouldn't know whether to carry on with a play or stop depending on the call. However, normally the players keep going on with the play as if it is a live ball. For example, in the instance that snepp posted above, Joe Mauer had to be called back to the plate from second base to continue his at bat and the outfielder acted as though it was fair the entire time. Mostly because it was fair by a large margin.

Players should play as they do now, and the umpires will call it as they see it like they do now. It will be sorted out as it should be after that.