digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Baseball GMs Recommend Instant Replay for MLB games

hosted.ap.org — For the first time Tuesday, baseball general managers recommended instant replay be used to help umpires make difficult decisions.

Who dugg this? Made popular Nov 6, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

88 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • xposiactionx, on 11/07/2007, -6/+22Replay is not going to help baseball. I love MLB, and I get pissed at a bad call like everyone else, but that's the game. Always has been. Sometimes you get a break and you win because of it, sometimes you lose a ring because of it.
  • davidrools, on 11/07/2007, -1/+12I think it makes sense, since it's a critical call, far away from the ump and more difficult to judge, and won't slow the game down too much. I have to give credit to the umps, they really do a fantastic job. They're very rarely wrong right on tags and timing outs, and most home plate umps are pretty consistent with their strike zone. And they're doing this at full speed. It's sometimes superhuman the way we can just make the call watching it in super slow mo on TV, while the ups consistently get it right the first time.

    And I'm old school. I figure most erroneous calls are random and affect all teams equally. It's part of the game. Frustrating, yes, but still part of the game-just like the weather or injuries.
  • uselessexpert, on 11/07/2007, -2/+12I think this is a good thing. I've seen many instances were the umpire makes a call, and I know it was the wrong call, then you see the replay on tv from 5 different angles proving it was the wrong call, and the team that could of won, looses because of a lousy/bad call.

    Hope they go through with it.
  • gnychis, on 11/07/2007, -1/+10but then there will be no fights between managers and umps leading to base stealing and ejection from the game :(
  • Araxen, on 11/11/2007, -4/+13You obviously don't watch alot of baseball. There are a fair number of blown calls.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -6/+15I dunno, as much as i agree it helps with calls it sort of takes away from the novelty of it all.
  • Klak, on 11/09/2007, -1/+9i want it but NO replays for balls and strikes. only for tags and whether or not a ball is a homerun.
  • MikeonTV, on 11/11/2007, -5/+13If the players are going to use technology - in the form of steroids - then I see no problem with the umpires (who may also be on steroids) to use instant replays to judge calls.
  • DrPill, on 11/07/2007, -8/+13Finally we can have 6 hour long baseball games. I like it.
  • Fox318, on 11/07/2007, -3/+7I disagree. I think that calls are an important part to baseball and human error or not it should be accepted that the umpires call the game. The interesting thing about baseball is that each ump calls the game differently(strike zones). Legendary calls in baseball are whats so fun about it. You never know whats going to happen.

    Does anyone here really that this will stop people from saying calls were bad?? No.

    Hell if it were up to the owners each player would be wearing Spiderman 2 uniforms and playing with Spiderman 2 labeled bats. Fans need to keep baseball intact and not become a game where inches matter.
  • postingbh, on 11/07/2007, -1/+4This is a good move if they keep it to boundary (HR, fair/foul) calls.
  • Fox318, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3At least I have a girlfriend.
  • xtc46, on 11/07/2007, -2/+5inches do matter...your girlfriends just been lying to you.
  • sgtbutterscotch, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3No. That's like asking if the weekend is too short.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3There was a time when "always has been" could be stupidly applied to players wearing gloves or helmets.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2it won't even be used for outs/safe calls. Nor should it. Especially on non-froce plays. Because what if you have a guy in a run down and the umpire calls him out. A replay rules that he missed the tag. Do you automatically give the batter a base? The play stopped when the ump called him out. No one can say for sure that if both the runner and the fielders kept playing that the guy would have been safe.
  • statikuz, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3You have, after all, seen every baseball game ever played.
  • LnghrnEngineer, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2Never. I hate instant replay in Football. It slows the game down. Even worse is TV time outs. This is coming from a guy that goes to every home UT game.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2I wouldn't leave it up to the umpires on the field to decide when to use it. They need to do like hockey. At the league office in Toronto they have several replay officials watching the games. When there is a play that looks like it should be reviewed, they let the on ice officials know to hold things up. (Or, if the play is still continuing, they actually watch the replays while they are still playing so they they may have already decided by the time there is a stoppage.) It makes far more sense for someone who is watching the footage to make that call since they have already seen if it looks like the call was wrong. It also takes less time since they can be already reviewing it long before the umpires could gather and decide if they want it reviewed.

    I was disappointed to read in the article that they are considering doing it more like football with the completely idiotic "challenge" method. That is why basically, the perfect system would be as follows:

    1. Only for home runs and ground rule doubles. (fair/foul, and over or under the home run line.)
    2. Decided by a centralized replay office, not by the managers.
    3. Replays limited to 30 seconds or less. (personally I would prefer 20 seconds.) Basically, just enough to look at the replay from each angle, and then pick the best angle to view again if needed. After that, if you can't tell, the call on the field stands. This is a MUST. The problem with the NFL is that they don't look at it as overturning egregious calls. They see is as a second chance to make a call, so they see no need to really try to get the first call correct. But it really is ridiculous. If you can't tell after watching it 5 times, then almost by definition the evidence is not conclusive, so the play should stand.

    I doubt they would ever consider it for balls and strikes, but I do fear they would try to add close plays on the base. And while it may work there are too many variables. Would you use it only for force outs? Would you use it only for did the ball arrive before the runner touched, or would they are using it to take away the "neighborhood play" at second base to start double plays. That would be bad. (Not that I am a fan of the second baseman clearly being off the bag, but this is something that umpires KNOW is happening so they should call it themselves.) Also, what if an umpire calls a runner out for the third out and a runner from third who would have scored if he was safe, never touches home plate. (This is unlikely since the runner would usually touch home well before the runner. But not if it was a slow roller down the third base line and the runner had to hold up to avoid an easy tag play.)
  • Klak, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2i would assume that would be like an "unchallengeable play" in football like when the ref blows the play dead
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2Personal fouls, pass interference, holding, etc. cannot be replayed in football (similar to disputed fouls). Neither can delay of game (similar to shot clock violation). I don't know what else you would want to replay except traveling. There are so many possessions in a basketball game compared to football or baseball, a LOT of bad calls would have to be made before instant replay was more widely used.
  • haterrade, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3i agree..the strike zones should be left to judgment but home runs aren't judgment calls..its either out or not...whenever it's a close call they already spend 20 minutes figuring out if anyone saw if the hr hit the yellow line so why not take a look at the big video screen at the top of the stadium and see if it actually cleared the wall?
  • Hobbes24, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2quite.

    they should quit resisting progress and go with the better method. the "purity" of baseball went out the door with Bonds
  • Spoomeister, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2The entire point of the way baseball is structured - a long season playing nearly every day, all that travel, that 6-month grind to get to the playoffs - is to take the long view. A true contender, a true winner, **plays better than the margin of error**.
    If your team is relying on a bad/missed call in order to win a game, and on those won games to get into the playoffs or win them, GTFH.
    Life is messy. People are imprecise. Errors, accidents and near misses happen. Arguing calls and yelling "kill the ump" is part of the game, has been for 100 years+.
    Don't make the game of baseball sterile. (That's what steroids are for! Ba-dump, bump.)
  • DonKarnage25, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3Noooooo!!!!! Baseball is perfect the way it is! As it's stated above, human error is part of the game! I was an umpire for a woman's softball league and no matter what, if the call is right or wrong, the umpire is always wrong! You think just because they spend a couple minutes looking it over on a TV screen, that's going to change? I don't think so.
  • zioxide, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2They're only going to use it for possible home runs, fan interference on possible home runs, and fair/foul balls.

    Personally I'm not really sure about it. I like the fact that baseball is still completely human. And most of the time the umpires get together on questionable calls (think Manny Ramirez's almost home run in Game 5 of this year's ALCS) and end up getting it right.
  • inactive, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2Itis only a part of the game because they had no better option n hte past. If they had cameras and replay technology in the 1800s, Doubelday would have had no problem with using it.
    Professional sports is NOT A GAME! It is a career. People shouldn't have their career's affected by mistakes made by other people.
  • blacknred0, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2i agree, and making it with instant replay calls it just going to lose the aspect of baseball is not going to be the same any more
  • JPOOPOO, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1Considering how much people care about who wins in the game and how easy it is for an umpire to make a mistake on a very close call, the game is extremely novel.
  • Mais, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1It's part of the excitement of baseball. It really does not have a place in baseball. Football is a made for TV sport, instant replay fits right in. If they do this, there better be very strict rules on it.
  • Mais, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1It's part of the excitement of baseball. It really does not have a place in baseball. Football is a made for TV sport, instant replay fits right in. If they do this, there better be very strict rules on it.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1To those talking about 5 hour games..you may want to read the article. becuase it talks about how in addition to this possible change, they are discussing changes to prevent what is currently making every game 3 1/2 hours. Limiting how often players get out of the batter's box to stroll halfway down the third base line between pitches. Or how often/long conferences on the mound can go, etc.
    If they have the balls to go through with this, and actually get the umpires to ENFORCE it, then we will see games consierably SHORTENED, even withinstant replay. And then maybe the average wil come in under 3 hours again.
  • Araxen, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I highly doubt they'll use Instant Replay for strikes/balls, that would be just dumb. Replays should be at the umpires discretion. Umpires in the last few years have gotten better at talking with each other to make the right call so I would trust they'll use instant replay when it's absolutely necessary. People were afraid of the change in the NFL but the NFL has been better for it with Instant Replay than without it. Baseball will be the same way.
  • JPOOPOO, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I hope they don't. What if an ump makes a bad call so some douche bag loses, letting the cool guy win? That would be the *****.
    How about the people that do want it start their own game? They can call it Replayball, and it will suck.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1They DO go to commercial. And people still notice becuase it often is still going on when they come back. The problem is the ref is the same ref who made the call, and therefore doesn't use replay as it is intended, which is to overturn obviously wrong calls. Instead, they use it to basically watch the whole play again as if it is the first time, and then make the call again.
    The sports that implement replay smartly (NBA, NHL and tennis) all have had tremendous success. Yes, some bad calls stil get through. But most are corrected, and it does not interfere with the flow of the games at all. Like I mentioned below, in baseball, most bad calls are accompanies by arguing anyway. It they simply looked at replay while the manager was arguing, the call could be reviewed before the play was ready to resume anyway.
  • Klak, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1i hate people trying to keep baseball in the Grover Cleveland era. there are new stats, new strategies, and a new way of thinking about the game and its winning world series. get used to it
  • Pwelborn1, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I disagree, human error has always been a variable in baseball. If they bring in instant replay where is the incentive and ranking system for umpires going to go? The way it is now, if you make too many bad calls then you can loose your job as a MLB umpire. I think there will always be that small bit of human error even with the best, but it's what makes baseball so pure. I really don't want to see the day when balls/strikes are reviewed, that will be then end of pitching duels.
  • JPOOPOO, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1That was a beautiful metaphor.
  • phantom73, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1Spoomeister - that is a brilliant post
  • Rethcir, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I would love to see this implemented in the limited circumstances they mention. Players and teams deserve to be credited with homers that they might be denied otherwise. I think that using a centralized replay office, this could be done with minimal interruption to the game, as well, similar to hockey goals.
  • Rethcir, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I would hazard to say that most of the umps are actually on the highly scientifically developed Babe Ruth steroid formula of beer and hotdogs. Now Ed Hochuli, on the other hand, he could probably beat canseco in his prime in an arm wrestling contest.
  • filovirus, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1The games are too damn long and they need a pitch clock.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I may not be extremely common, but does that make losing a game to only one bad call any less troubling?

    The very fact that it will be used most often on home runs means wit will be used only when the call has a MAJOR impact on games. Most games anyway. Yes, a bad call on a home run may be the only bad call in the game. But if it takes anywhere from 1 to 4 runs off the board for a team it will have a bigger impact than dozens of bad ball/strike calls.
  • sentanta, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
  • VermiciousKnid, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1they have replays in cricket, called the 3rd umpire, and it works great on runouts, should work too in baseball.
  • A-money, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1hahahaha, no one would ever consider replays for balls and strikes, even as a remote option
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1It is only a part of the game becuase the technology didn't exist. Games should NOt be won or lost on bad calls. That is just plain absurd.
    Bsaeball is no more "sacred" than any other sport. It is a ***** GAME. Just like football, basketball, hockey, tennis, eetc. Bad calls are bad calls. Period. It is not like Abner Doubleday was thinking "Well, bad calls are a part of the game."
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1And why did they get it right in the ACLS? Because they had two extra umpires.
    Are you suggesting that it would hurt any worse if your team missed the playoffs, or lost in the playoffs on an obvious bad call becuase "they get MOST of them right." There is no place in ANY sport for an official to control the outcome by making bad calls. The game should be decided by the players.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1#3 is hte only one that it will be used for of the 3 you mentioned. And it happens A LOT.
  • inactive, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1there is nothing novel about mistakes.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 88 of 88 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.