Originally posted by BigDaddyLocoIt was a shitty call, but I still like the human element of baseball. Replay would be nice, I just don't know how you cram it into a game that already can drag on for four or more hours.
Then simply follow the NFL model. Allow each team 1 video replay challenge per game until the 9th or extra innings (where it's a "booth review"), and the game will not be interrupted and we can maintain the human element umpires provide.
I am a baseball purist & would like to maintain baseball's century of tradition, but to completely ignore the technology available would be foolish. In a time where the majority of fans "listened" to the game it was easy to get past even the most monumentally bad call, but in an era of HDTV/Internet it is impossible to ignore the reaction these calls will generate.
Originally posted by Leroy Would you be in favor of eliminating umpires entirely if it meant increasing the "purity" of the competition?
The game is called by umpires. That's part of the game - and their errors are just as much apart of the competition as errors committed by the players.
I'm thinking that if there were something to replace the umps with that would be more accurate, than, yes, I would be in favor of eliminating umpires.
I mean, injuries are part of the game, but when there are technological advances that reduce injuries or allow players to recover from them faster, that's a good thing. (Of course, there are concerns that some of those things may have adverse side effects, but that's a separate issue.) The question, I guess, is whether umpire errors are a *good* part of the game, or merely a neccessary evil. What do you like about umpire errors?
For everyone who was calling for Selig to retroactively overturn this call, my question is what happens the next time a high-profile mistake happens, only this one is going the other way? When a player is called out who was really safe? Are you prepared to start having games restarted because if you're going to set the precedent of allowing calls to be reversed for something that is essentially meaningless beyond the personal importance for Galaragga, how could you possibly be against it when it happens at some point that would alter a game result, or more importantly perhaps a playoff result? What would the statute of limitations be? If an ump screws up a call in June, and the aggreived team loses a division by one game can they demand the call be reversed and the game restarted in late September when they need that game back?
If you're going to change 125 years of precedent simply to give a single player a historical accomplishment you better be ready to extend that courtesy out to where it would actually have an impact on the outcome of games.
1. Jones played some center field before/after Agee. 2. Harrelson wasn't even a full-time starter most of the time.... 3. Seaver would slice Piazza's throat for his bad arm, and I meant to type Grote 4. Hunt was the first real Met All-Star.