Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Ohio State And Florida Target 2013 Receiver Recruits

Instant Replay In Baseball

Whether it's right or wrong, whether we like it or not, it's coming.

With conservative estimates that instant replay units will be installed in all parks by the end of August, a new era in the game is just around the corner.  While Major League Baseball hasn't officially announced the adoption of replay, motions on and off the field have put into play wheels that won't stop.  It's already been determined what it will be used for (disputed home runs calls only); all that's left to decide is how to deal with specific situations (if a ball that had initially been ruled a home run is ruled to have, say, hit below the yellow line).

So, what changes?  How does this affect the "purity" of the game--or would this, in fact, ensure that the "purity" of the game is upheld?  There are a lot of questions in play, and rightfully so.  This isn't a change in uniform, it's a significant alteration in determining results.

Ultimately, the institution of replay will ensure that proper calls are made on questionable home run calls.  But, like changes in technology, acceptable public behavior or advances made in animation--is this just the first step in what could be a series of major changes and alterations?  Five years down the line, will baseball allow Ron Gardenhire to challenge the call that Carlos Gomez was thrown out trying to steal second base, or whether Francisco Liriano's slider was in fact strike three instead of ball four?

Major changes such as the one we're about to see are hardly ever Stand Alone.  The question then becomes this:  Is it better to allow these types of changes (and this change in particular) in the hope that accuracy is ensured and the right calls are made, in spite of the fact that more controversial addendums to the game will be made, or to not allow any changes and keep the game as it is?  There are pros and cons on both fronts, but it certainly appears that as of now Bud Selig and Major League Baseball believe they're bettering the game.

I don't mind this change, but that's by no means a blanket agreement to future alterations or additions to instant replay.  Mostly I'm okay with replay because I think it's important to get calls right, especially on big-impact plays.  At the same time, there will always be issues with calls that are made on the field, and while home run calls will be accurate there will always be something else to disagree with:  Balls and strikes, safe or out, fair or foul, high or low, interference or clean.

By now I think you're all aware of where I'm going with this, no matter what your opinions are.  Baseball's next big hurdle will be to know where to draw the line.  I'm for this incarnation of instant replay, but am I simply advocating more changes down the line?

Poll
What are your feelings on instant replay?
Instant Replay is good
42 votes
Instant Replay is bad
37 votes

79 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 17 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Replays are good only if they are used for really controversial calls

and should be used at a maximum two times a game. even if there are five controversial calls but only three of them are not so bad, but two could change the course of a game then that is when you use them. Umpires should still be umpires.

by BCTwins on Aug 21, 2008 1:24 PM EDT reply actions  

Do it like the NFL

Give the managers a limited number of challenges. However, home run wall calls and foul pole calls should just come from the booth if they’re close.

I don’t see anything wrong with wanting to get calls right. I also don’t mind if this works its way into tag calls, or “beat the throw” calls, provided it’s limited. If the managers have a certain number of challenges, I think this would be good for the game.

I hope it doesn’t work its way into balls and strikes though.

by Neil on Aug 21, 2008 1:53 PM EDT reply actions  

Agreed on all points

Well said, sir.

formerly known in these parts as adamb

by ravenfly on Aug 21, 2008 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yes!

Imagine if a manager has a chance to argue up to three calls a game. But rather than ranting or raving, he simply indicates to the ump that he wants a replay. And he can’t argue balls and strikes. Why would the umps have a problem with this? Are they afraid they’ll be embarrassed by their own incompetence?

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 21, 2008 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

If anyone would have a problem, the umps would..

Imagine someone telling you they’re going to get a machine to do part of your job. I can understand why they’re hesitant. I’m sure they’ll come around.

by Neil on Aug 21, 2008 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

Dunno

In a game as episodic and stop-start as Baseball, it makes sense to try it. It wouldn’t work in Hockey/Soccer/Basketball type sports, but in baseball it seems to make sense, so long as it is short of calling balls and strikes. Once you get that far, then there’s no point in having a home plate umpire; just put out a QuesTec machine and be done with it.

by Zathras on Aug 21, 2008 2:10 PM EDT reply actions  

I completely agree

The pivotal point is that instant replay must not slow down the game any further – which it won’t if it finally puts a stop to these ridiculous manager tantrums. And when people have gotten used to correct home run calls, let QuesTec take over balls and strikes.

by PhoenixV on Aug 21, 2008 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

Actually

I’m very much against using a QuesTec machine to call balls and strikes. I think it’s a big part of the game learning the strike zone that the Ump is going to give you on the night, figuring out what stuff you’ve got working etc. Without the variance in calls by the ump, I think the game is less interesting.

by Zathras on Aug 21, 2008 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed, Zathras.

Well-put. Good hitters adjust to a tight strike zone, ptichers as well… It’s part of the strategy of the game.

by Neil on Aug 21, 2008 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ah, I misread your comment

I hate the idea that the ump’s personal idisyncrasies should have any sort of influence on the game. Rules are rules. Yes, it takes skill to adjust to the strike zone on a given day, but over the relatively short span of a game there’s bound to be more randomness than actual skill involved.

by PhoenixV on Aug 21, 2008 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

ONLY for questionable home runs

If you want to argue ball/strike or out/safe or fair/foul, tough titties.

If it goes any further, I hate it.

by TMW on Aug 21, 2008 3:19 PM EDT reply actions  

I agree with you on ball/strike

But why would you hate it if they got the other types of calls right?

by Neil on Aug 21, 2008 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Only good if

It doesn’t prolong games.
It humbles umpires.

by Johnny Safron on Aug 22, 2008 12:49 AM EDT reply actions  

I love

I love this. I think it’s a long time coming for the home run calls.

I agree that the managers shouldn’t have any kind of challenge flag. In the NFL, you can take away a time out. There isn’t really any such penalty in baseball you could administer for missing a challenge.

I would be ok if they decided to add to challenges in the playoffs where umpires could elect to review close plays at home as well as home run balls. But in the regular season, I only really support reviewing the home run balls, which is a rare enough occurrence that it wouldn’t be a factor for slowing the game down often, and probably won’t even slow the game down then since when these situations come up, 5-10 minutes is burnt with the manager throwing a fit and the fans freaking out.

"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all."
~ Earl Weaver
"In God we trust. All others must provide evidence."
~ Billy Beane

by AdamOnFirst on Aug 22, 2008 2:37 AM EDT reply actions  

Good point on the time spent arguing. Agree on no challenge flag and limit to boundary calls. I’d include balls down the line at some point too, but that’s it.

by Adam Peterson on Aug 22, 2008 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed
I agree that the managers shouldn’t have any kind of challenge flag. In the NFL, you can take away a time out. There isn’t really any such penalty in baseball you could administer for missing a challenge.

I agree, for two additional reasons. First of all, I see no reason to limit the number of reviewed plays, which I assume is one of the purposes of having challenges. Does anyone really think it’s a good idea to review a couple questionable homers early in the game, but because of some arbitrary limit, you can’t review the questionable homer that decides the game in the bottom of the 9th? That’s ridiculous.

Also, I think that allowing managerial challenges is unnecessary, because the occurrences that replay applies to are infrequent enough and obvious enough that there’s not much point in running it by the manager first just to delay things even longer.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Aug 22, 2008 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

If you're only talking about home run calls

Sure, we don’t need manager challenges. But if this expands into “beat the throw” type calls (and I don’t see why it wouldn’t), I think it’d be perfectly logical to have a limited number of challenges.

And why does there need to be a penalty if the manager challenges incorrectly? In the NFL they do this because it takes time out of the game that wouldn’t usually be taken. In baseball, the challenge is just replacing the manager argument.

And for Adam P, I care much less about down the line calls than I do about beating the throw.

by Neil on Aug 22, 2008 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

TT is an SB Nation blog of, by and for the fans. We strive to be the best Minnesota Twins blog by providing quality content and analysis, as well as daily news and notes on the team. We hope you'll make Twinkie Town your home for all things Twins!

Twinkie Town On Twitter


Editor-In-Chief

Twinkietown_small Jesse

Senior Writer

Small Bobomojo

Hrbek_small Jon Marthaler

The_jet_small cmathewson

Gladdentwins_small Adam Peterson

Hosken_powell_autograph_small RandBall's Stu

Twins_woo_small Steve Adams

W00t__2__small brandonwarne52

Special Contributor

Small roger13

Untitled_small Trevour

Chairmanmauer_small fischean