Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

[ehh]

Discussed at the GM's meeting.

[SPTO]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

I doubt they bring in any kind of instant replay. This is MLB we're talking about. The league is so institutionalized and geared toward tradition that it'd be too much of a shock.

Personally I like the human element of umpires making their calls even if it means teams get robbed from time to time.

[Stu]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

Interesting. I don't think this will have a huge effect but it should be interesting to see if/how they implement it.

I still think the biggest issue is the length of games. They need to do away with the whole pitcher stepping off/batter stepping out. I like the whole back and forth game between batter and pitcher, but it's getting a little ridiculous. Julio Lugo steps out right before the pitcher is going to throw almost every at bat.

[SPTO]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

I agree with you cam.

I'd like to see a rule where if a pitcher is already into his motion and the guy steps out of the box it's an automatic strike no matter where the ball ends up.

I think that'd cut some of the funny business down.

[ehh]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

Umps almost always get it right. I was scared as hell though when Damon's HR to lead off the ALDS was originally called foul when it landed in fair territory. Fortunately enough they got it right.

[Trevytrev11]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

Well the vote was 25-5 in favor of the ruling, so it sounds like its a go for next year.

Personally I like it. These are plays where the ball is already dead, so there is no worry about assigning runners certain amount of bases (except if a HR is overturned-not sure how that would work).

But also I like it because it will probably actually speed up games. Think about what happens now. A ball is hit that is questionable. One coach comes out and argues that they got it wrong. The umpires get together, discuss it, make a ruling, then explain it to both coaches. One of the coaches is going to be unhappy and argue for a few more minutes. Meanwhile the pitcher get's tight from sitting around while all of this happens.

Now, it should take a minute at most and the game can go on quickly.

Especially with todays parks there are so many things right behind the fence that can cause the ball to do some quirky things that give the illusion of doing something else.

Baseball will continue to have the humar error element in it for all other calls, but most importantly, it will mean that the calls should be right.

[MassNole]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

Obviously they could never use IR for balls and strikes, but it is a tragedy MLB has been so slow to embrace technology.

[SPTO]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

Obviously they could never use IR for balls and strikes, but it is a tragedy MLB has been so slow to embrace technology.

Well there's questec (I think that's what it's called) but it's only used in a handful of parks. Pitchers seem to hate it. Every pitcher i've heard has bitched and moaned about it.

[ComfortablyLomb]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

I doubt they bring in any kind of instant replay. This is MLB we're talking about. The league is so institutionalized and geared toward tradition that it'd be too much of a shock.

Personally I like the human element of umpires making their calls even if it means teams get robbed from time to time.

That's a silly position. Why should we ever have to deal with a BS call when we have the technology to simply get it right?

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

Everything except balls and strikes should be up for review. The umps are being paid to get the calls right. If they don't get them right, or if there's any question, review the damn thing and get it right.

The managers should have one challenge per game (with no risk of losing anything, because nothing to take away in baseball), then after the 7th inning, it should be booth review.

If Kenny Lofton was ruled safe, things could have been much different.

[MassNole]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

But here lies the problem in baseball which is unique to every other sport. What do you do with a fair ball that is called foul? If reviewed, would you grant just a single? A ground rule double? What the ump reasonably thinks would happen? What about advancement of runners?

The obvious answer would be to instruct umpires to allow close calls to go as if the ball had been fair and then review later. But I don't know if MLB would embrace that.

[Knight165]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

That's a silly position. Why should we ever have to deal with a BS call when we have the technology to simply get it right?

It's not silly.....it's life.
We're not perfect and IMO it would make the games drag.(unless you are talking about just homerun calls, it's hard to tell with the balls and strikes aspect being introduced into the thread...that wouldn't lengthen the game any.)
They are already too long.
Every sport is the same....with the human element in place, there will be some questionable calls. As a player, manager and fan, you learn to deal with it....sometimes they go your way, sometimes the other, but the calls are good for the most part.

M.K.
Knight165

[Sportsforever]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

But here lies the problem in baseball which is unique to every other sport. What do you do with a fair ball that is called foul? If reviewed, would you grant just a single? A ground rule double? What the ump reasonably thinks would happen? What about advancement of runners?

The obvious answer would be to instruct umpires to allow close calls to go as if the ball had been fair and then review later. But I don't know if MLB would embrace that.

It would have to be just like in football where we have somethings that aren't reviewable. They could use it for just out/safe calls, fair/foul HR's, etc, but nothing that would affect baserunner advancement. Personally, I am not for instant replay in baseball (or any sport for that matter). The bad calls/good calls even out and I like the human element as a part of the game. I just can't imagine watching a baseball game and having to watch Bruce Froemming waddle over to the booth and look under the camera for 5 minutes while the starting pitcher tosses with the catcher to stay loose...it will get ridiculus.

[Sandman42]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

As long as they keep it just to home runs I'll be fine with it. Usually it's rare that umpires will actually get the wrong call on a home run though so I really don't see the need for it. I just don't want them to expand it to safe/out rulings as it would drag the game out so long if they go and review every close call on the bases.

[snowmizer]

Re: Instant Replay for HR's only may be in place for '08

Everything except balls and strikes should be up for review. The umps are being paid to get the calls right. If they don't get them right, or if there's any question, review the damn thing and get it right.

The managers should have one challenge per game (with no risk of losing anything, because nothing to take away in baseball), then after the 7th inning, it should be booth review.

If Kenny Lofton was ruled safe, things could have been much different.

There's an art to quite a bit of umpiring, which factors in shades of gray, as opposed to the theory that it's some sterile, mechanical science.

If baseball ever instituted a replay system that allowed Kenny Lofton to be re-ruled as safe, they will have implemented a broken system. Ball beats runner, fielder puts glove at front of base, runner slides in, fielder does nothing to prove to everybody watching that he missed the tag = out. Everybody involved in baseball from high school on upward understands this, which is why there wasn't even a peep from anybody on the field about it. (Commentators in the booth with too much time on their hands are another matter.)

There are countless practical, negative consequences when including everything up for review. Just one pretty obvious one... What about your typical in-the-neighborhood force at second to start a double play? Do people actually want more injured middle infielders to ensure 'true' outs at second, in case they're reviewable?



- Reviewing home runs for fair/foul always means reviewing the status of a dead ball. There is no downside.
- Learning a ball actually left the yard after mistakenly thinking it hit a wall and stayed in also has no problems.
- Learning a ball stayed in after mistakenly being ruled a HR would be a microscopic number compared to the other two categories, and would be the only one that could generate a follow-up controversy. I'd assume the umpires would have the power to put the runners where they think they would have otherwise ended up (the remedy for fan interference), and one manager could therefore feel victimized, but that's a small cost to gain the previous benefits.