Does the new replay rule hurt baseball?

[Postseason2006]

I was just curious as to how other people thought about the replay being used makes umpires more lazy about running out to get fair or foul correct.

 

On the "non" hit the other night off the bat of Tony Clark, the umpire just turned around making zero effort to get a view. Just a putrid attempt.

[JoeH33]

I'm a big fan of instant replay in all sports. There's nothing worse in my mind than having your favorite team lose a game because of a blown call. Therefore, I think that MLB should expand instant replay to cover more close plays. I will say, however, I do not think instant replay should ever be allowed on balls/strikes.

[PeaveyFury]

I was just curious as to how other people thought about the replay being used makes umpires more lazy about running out to get fair or foul correct.

 

Replay isn't used for fair or foul, just HR or not HR.

[JoeHova]

I think that balls and strikes should be called by a Questec-style program. Hopefully they'll get that done soon, there's no excuse to let a bunch of incompetent umps have such a huge impact on the game when the technology is there to call the game impartially. I'm also generally in favor of instant replay, I don't think it hurts anything.

[Invader3K]

Not using Questec at this point is only caused by the umpire's union. It's kind of silly, since they wouldn't lose their jobs...they would still be relaying the "call" from the Questec system, and would still call plays at each base.

[Mr QL]

im all for Questec and instant replay

 

I don't see how getting the calls right hurts the sport

[RightFieldCoder]

The umps would also need to interpret whether a batter swung at a pitch. It would also save the umpires headache if they can blame the calls players don't like on the technology.

[jeffy]

Not a big fan of replay in general because of the delays it causes, but the minimal use in MLB is okay. I only saw one MLB replay review so far and it was a pretty long delay. I had thought MLB was going to use a centralized review system rather than have the field umpires tramp off the field to review. Having a centralized reviewer who would relay the decision to the field umpires might be a little faster.

 

In the end sports are just games/entertainment and an occassional missed call is really not that big a deal. I certainly don't want to see an expansion of replay if it would mean 15 or 30 minutes of delays added to the average game time.

 

Having questec relay the ball/strike calls to the umpire should be implemented, assuming it could be done without creating any delay. Those are the calls that are missed (or inconsistent) far more often than any others.

[topper09er]

Well I guess I am the only baseball purist here so I'll take the other side. I think the HR replay is OK since it doesnt interfere with the gameplay, but I am against ALL other replay. I can't believe some people on here want a computer to call strikes and balls and then replay it to the umps!!! Why don't we just play video games. The umpires are part of baseball, they do a good job and it is almost impossible that any call could affect the outcome of a game, plus there are 162 games in the season. I guess even if there is some bad call that hurts the brewers (like on Friday) my reaction is that it is part of the game, just like when Prince hit a grand slam against the cubs that was brought back over the wall or someone hits a line drive right at a defender. Bad break, o well, go get em next time.

 

I think replay in the NFL is terrible, it causes the refs to be lazy, delays the game, and half of the time the result of the play is not even obvious after replay. How often to the commentators try to guess if the call will be reversed after watching the replay? A lot because things are not even obvious after many replays. I dont want the same thing in baseball. If there was replay on any in game call the umps would always have to err on the side of caution like how NFL refs are supposed (but still dont anyways) call everything a fumble so the play can be reviewed. That means every single fair/foul ball would have to be called fair so the play can continue and then need to be reviewed and possibly reversed. That would be rediculously slow and unnecesary. Or you would have to call every close play at a base safe so the other runners can continue and then review the call later and cause another delay. Or things like catch/trapped balls, what do you even do. What if you have a runner on 3rd with 1 out and an outfielder dives and maybe catches the ball or maybe trapped it? If you call it trap then the runner on third wont tag and score so what if you reverse it to a catch, is it just assumed the run would have scored or does the runner go back to third? What if there is a runner on 2nd, you call it a trap and he goes to 3nd and then it is reviewed and called an out? Does that runner just have to go back, what if the defense could have doubled him up, does he get a chance to tag up? Too many assumptions and too much delay.

 

I really dont like the arguement that just because the technology is there it must be used, that is stupid. We are not talking about national defense here, this is a sport that has tradition and beauty and should be left alone. Using replay does not decide life or death outcomes. There are metal bats now, better technology than wood, why dont we use metal bats in the majors? Players can take HGH and never age and have 20 year long primes, this is better technology than our natural bodies, why dont we just legalize all steroids? I just feel like true baseball fans can understand how a bad call is OK because it is part of the game and some people get so mad when they see one bad call against their team they just want replay because they think their team would have won the WS if there was replay or something.

[TooLiveBrew]

Imho anything to help the umps is great. They're human, and already have an extremely demanding job without being asked to guesstimate calls they may have no real way of seeing.

 

So far I haven't seen one replay delay that came anywhere close to ruining a game or anthing like that. I think the first time a huge HR call comes up in the postseason or pennant race, everyone will be glad replay is available.

 

 

Players can take HGH and never age and have 20 year long primes, this is better technology than our natural bodies, why dont we just legalize all steroids?

 

I think this exaggerates beyond the point of being a fair comparison to instant replay augmenting the resources of umpiring crews.

[JJHardy7]

I really dont like the arguement that just because the technology is there it must be used, that is stupid.

 

Why is it 'stupid'? I'd rather get the call right. I'm all for making things better as long as it doesn't delay the game a ton.

 

It's also not just a 'game'. It's a big business. It stopped being a 'game' a long time ago. I don't want the Brewers to lose any games because of a bad call.

[topper09er]

I really dont like the arguement that just because the technology is there it must be used, that is stupid.

 

Why is it 'stupid'? I'd rather get the call right. I'm all for making things better as long as it doesn't delay the game a ton.

 

It's also not just a 'game'. It's a big business. It stopped being a 'game' a long time ago. I don't want the Brewers to lose any games because of a bad call.

It is stupid because it is not a good reason, it is just a reason. The umpires are part of the game, they have their own strikes zones and it is part of the game of baseball to play while accounting for the umpires, if you dont like this then you dont like baseball because that is how it is. I would rather leave baseball the way it is then totally change it into some video game called by robots just so we can get fix the 1% of calls which are wrong.

[JJHardy7]

It is stupid because it is not a good reason, it is just a reason. The umpires are part of the game, they have their own strikes zones and it is part of the game of baseball to play while accounting for the umpires, if you dont like this then you dont like baseball because that is how it is. I would rather leave baseball the way it is then totally change it into some video game called by robots just so we can get fix the 1% of calls which are wrong.

 

So getting it right is not a good reason? Strike zones are strike zones. I'm very annoyed by how this changes based on an ump or what type of 'status' a pitcher has. It's a joke.

[Roderick]

I can't believe some people on here want a computer to call strikes and balls and then replay it to the umps!!!

Replay? I'm not familiar with the system, but if it is like what tennis uses for in/out there is no replay for umps to look at. I assume the ump would have a handheld wireless guage that would light up (and probably make a specific sound) for a ball or strike for that throw. It wouldn't take much longer, if at all, for the ref to say ball or strike than he currently does.

 

Then all you would need is some kid from MIT to hack the system and start controlling the ball and strike calls.

[bani1717]

I think topper09er brings up one very good point, and that is that the institution of replay on plays other than home runs is easier said than done. Fair/foul I guess I can see though, since it is like the HR situation - either the play is still live, or it is dead at the point the ball hits the dirt. In this case you don't have to worry about all the "what-ifs" as to what would happen if the play would've continued the other way (like you would have to in the ball caught/not caught scenario).

 

And I find the video game comparisons interesting because, while I don't currently own a baseball video game, from the ones I remember playing, there are random times when a strike/ball is called incorrectly. The system may call a pitch a little outside the zone a strike or a pitch just inside the zone a ball. That's obviously a lot less important than actual MLB games, but I always was entertained by the "missed calls" in the game and enjoyed seeing them once in a while.

[BrewCrewForever]

I'm all for it but just on HR not HR and Fair or Foul. Obviously they do not have it yet for fair or foul but they should, as evident by Friday night Brewers game. That one blown call cost the Brewers that game.

[Ennder]

Football players should stop using helmets too, the game was meant to be played without them.

 

Sometimes a change to the game is for the better.

[bani1717]

Bad analaogy... last time I checked, baseball instant replay doesn't affect a player's safety.

 

Even still, I see your point.

[Ennder]

Bad analaogy... last time I checked, baseball instant replay doesn't affect a player's safety.

 

Even still, I see your point.

I agree but I was mostly replying to this quote...

 

There are metal bats now, better technology than wood, why dont we use metal bats in the majors? Players can take HGH and never age and have 20 year long primes, this is better technology than our natural bodies, why dont we just legalize all steroids?

 

Those are obviously safety related issues as well.

[jeffy]

I think topper09er brings up one very good point, and that is that the institution of replay on plays other than home runs is easier said than done. Fair/foul I guess I can see though, since it is like the HR situation - either the play is still live, or it is dead at the point the ball hits the dirt. In this case you don't have to worry about all the "what-ifs" as to what would happen if the play would've continued the other way (like you would have to in the ball caught/not caught scenario).

It would be a problem when it is called foul if the call is changed to fair as you would have to guess where the batter and base runners would have been had it been called fair.

 

Electronic assistance on balls and strikes would not have that problem, I'm assuming it could be done pretty much in real time.

[bani1717]

The current rule could also be a problem if a play is called a HR (in which the players would trot around the bases) but is then reversed to not be a HR. I don't know if this is the case or not, but maybe umps are told to err on the side of calling it in play and not a HR so the play continues. If that is the case, they could be told to also err on the side of calling close ones fair instead of foul. So the fair/foul replay wouldn't create any problems that aren't around now with the current replay system, unless I'm missing something about the current replay rules.

[danzig6767]

I think replay in the NFL is terrible, it causes the refs to be lazy, delays the game, and half of the time the result of the play is not even obvious after replay. How often to the commentators try to guess if the call will be reversed after watching the replay? A lot because things are not even obvious after many replays. I dont want the same thing in baseball.

College football IMO has a much better system. They have a man in the booth that is watching replays all game. So instead of all the wasted time in NFL where the official on the field goes over to a replay booth, in college football a guy was watching the replays as fans on TV were. A signal gets sent up to him and he sends his ruling down to the official on the field. The process is often quite quick, rarely does it take more than a minute, two at most. Plus, because the official on the field isn't making the call, a bunch of time isn't wasted by both coaches arguing with the on field ref because he's only relaying the final decision sent to him by the replay official in the booth.

[CarRamrod01]

No fair! You changed the outcome by accurately measuring it!

[jeffy]

The current rule could also be a problem if a play is called a HR (in which the players would trot around the bases) but is then reversed to not be a HR.

You're right, so now I can not understand why they did not include foul balls as a "boundary call" that would be subject to review. When they were first talking about this last year, I had thought foul balls were included as I heard several times that review would be for "fair or foul, home run or not".

 

They could even limit the non-home run fair/foul review to cases where a fly ball hits the ground in the outfield, leaving out cases such as was a ground ball over the base or not or where a fielder has a fly ball go off his glove near the foul line.

[Godspeed]

It seems so easy to implement technology to fix the fair/foul issue. Put a chip in the ball, mark the lines and bases (or maybe just mark fair territory in general to account for ground balls skewing sideways after the base), and have a computer automatically decide whether the hit is fair or foul. There would be no need for review, no need to worry about where the runners should be on an overturned call, no delays.

 

There's no reason this couldn't be used in a similar way on the top of the outfield wall for Home Runs, too.

 

Researchers from Carnegie Mellon is working on a system for accurately tracking/spotting a football in game play. Maybe they'll get bored and decide tinker with baseball.