#1 Posted on 11.11.04 1052.45 Reposted on: 11.11.11 1055.13
This is one of the agendas that GMs will vote on in the current meetings (story.news.yahoo.com)
I'm not sure how they would be able to define what type of play is replayable. While in theory it is nice to be able to correct a foul ball/fair ball call, I can't imagine how it would work in practice.
If a fair ball is called foul, then the play stops. How would going to replay correct that instance? It's not like other sports where the play will continue & you can correct it at the end of a play. You can't "correct" a ball that is called foul unless it's a home run. I can't imagine how they would be able to implement the Instant Replay in baseball...
Since last post: 2572 days Last activity: 1041 days
#2 Posted on 11.11.04 1200.28 Reposted on: 11.11.11 1201.41
I umpire little league and Legion games (going for my PIAA patch as soon as I get time), and the human element is slowly being taken out of Major League Baseball. I think the Quest-tec system proved that umpires were getting ball/strike calls right most of the time, and I think they've done a very good job most of the time. Replay would make long games longer, and only home run balls being reviewed would make a difference. I can't imagine what you would do with a guy on first and a reversed call making a line drive down the right field line a fair ball. Does the guy on first go home? Is it umpire's discretion? Nobody knows how fast or slow an outfielder would get to the ball, if he boots it, etc...
On the other hand, during one of the first games that I umpired, I called a foul ball on a ball that everybody thought went out of the park fair. Of course, this field had two foul poles in right field (they literally moved the field like 5 feet to the right) and I don't remember which pole I was looking at. I still wonder if I made the right call. Of course, the 4th grader who hit it told me to get my head out of my ass, so I didn't feel as bad calling the little bastard's ball foul. It sucks to have runs taken off of the board because of a bad call. I've always been of the opinion that during the course of a season it all evens out, however.
#3 Posted on 11.11.04 2002.46 Reposted on: 11.11.11 2329.04
This is an awful idea, and the people who bring it in to baseball deserves censure.
Originally posted by Roy.Of course, the 4th grader who hit it told me to get my head out of my ass, so I didn't feel as bad calling the little bastard's ball foul. It sucks to have runs taken off of the board because of a bad call.
Since last post: 3042 days Last activity: 2854 days
#4 Posted on 11.11.04 2156.05 Reposted on: 11.11.11 2329.27
I kinda liked how the umpires have tackled controversial calls lately (and, in particular, during the ALCS). If the play was really debatable or uncertain, all of the officials got together and helped each other out on what they saw. In each case, the right call wound up being made, too. This sounds like a much better idea than drawing out prolonged games even more with consulting new technology or potentially leaving the playing field to review calls.
I also hope it NEVER comes to having balls and strikes up for debate. That should remain the sole discretion of the home plate umpire, and instead of complaining players, coaches, and fans should just learn to adjust and live with it. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," as they say. Imagine the anarchy if every borderline pitch or check-swing were up for grabs.
Since last post: 3570 days Last activity: 3207 days
#6 Posted on 12.11.04 1126.09 Reposted on: 12.11.11 1127.12
I just heard that the GM's voted this down, which I'm sure should come to a shock to no one. Selig is supposedly dead-set against it, so thats the last we will probably hear about that. I still hadn't figured out how it would be implemented. Oh well, its all academic now...
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE