Problems with MLB umpiring

[The stache]

In my humble opinion, if you institute replay at all beyond reviewing home runs near the foul pole, you're opening Pandora's Box. Every play at the plate is going to be argued, and reviewed. Every close play at first, pivotal ball and strike calls..there's no end to the potential increase in game time if this is implemented.

 

The game has been played for some 150 years with no replay, and it doesn't need it now. Umpires are human, and make mistakes. Sometimes those mistakes hurt a team, sometimes they help them. I have a feeling it all evens out in the end. Umpires are part of the overall charm of the game, and if you lessen their roles, or take them out all together, the game loses part of it's appeal.

[adambr2]

I do agree that the nature of baseball makes it difficult to determine exactly what sorts of calls should be subject to review and that there likely needs to be some limit put on how many reviews that can be made (potentially reviewing every safe/out call, for example, would be nuts), but to be against replay because of tradition or the desire to maintain the "human element" of the game is just absurd.

 

If you don't want a human element, then why even bother having on-field umpires? Put a few guys up in a booth somewhere with some TV monitors and 'Pitch Track' or whatever. This way, we wouldn't have to worry about a call being overturned.

 

Personally, I don't want to watch games in which every close play results in a five minute delay, but that's me. There have been blown calls throughout baseball history, and officiating is probably no worse these days than it has ever been. The problem is that with every single game televised and the internet, every blown call becomes an international incident.

 

You know this is an extreme exaggeration, especially if done right with someone already up in a booth looking at the play. If this individual in the booth is vigilant and already reviewing the play immediately after it occurs, there's really no reason it should take more than 30 seconds or so even on the closest of calls. You could easily say that a call that can't be overturned in 60 seconds from when it is called for is inconclusive and thus stands.

 

That's a very minimal amount of time -- a manager argument, a visit to the mound, even a timeout at the plate, etc. Very few calls are close enough to warrant review. You're not going to be looking at balls and strikes or every out at a base, you're going to be looking at bang-bang base calls or close line calls, and in almost any game there's only going to be a small handful of those.

[dlk9s]

If you don't want a human element, then why even bother having on-field umpires?

Because most of the time, there is no need for replay. The one or two times a game there is a need for it, though, it should be available. Plus, umpires do more than just call balls/strikes and safe/out.

 

Personally, I don't want to watch games in which every close play results in a five minute delay, but that's me.

Come on, you can do better that.

 

There have been blown calls throughout baseball history, and officiating is probably no worse these days than it has ever been. The problem is that with every single game televised and the internet, every blown call becomes an international incident.

And wouldn't it be nice to be able to correct a blown call? I sure think so. Hell, I bet the umps think so, too. I know Jim Joyce would've been a lot happier last year.

[dlk9s]

Disagree. It depends what your goals for the game are. If the #1 goal is to make baseball as fair of a game as humanly possible, then yes. However, some might say that baseball is a form of entertainment, and it certainly makes the game more "entertaining" when the human element is involved. Baseball is an emotional game, and the "human element" makes it moreso.

 

(I wouldn't consider myself as particularly leaning in either direction, just pointing out competing viewpoints)

 

If I wanted to watch something where officiating mistakes/problems made it more "entertaining," I'd watch professional wrestling.

[Nottso]

Disagree. It depends what your goals for the game are. If the #1 goal is to make baseball as fair of a game as humanly possible, then yes. However, some might say that baseball is a form of entertainment, and it certainly makes the game more "entertaining" when the human element is involved. Baseball is an emotional game, and the "human element" makes it moreso.

 

(I wouldn't consider myself as particularly leaning in either direction, just pointing out competing viewpoints)

 

If I wanted to watch something where officiating mistakes/problems made it more "entertaining," I'd watch professional wrestling.

 

I just typed that very thing.

[Ennder]

 

No kidding. I refed a few freshman basketball games and it was way harder than any umping I've ever done. I'd never want to do basketball again. Basically there are fouls being committed all over the court and you have to decide which to call and which to just ignore or the game stops every 10 seconds all the while being complained to by the players, coaches and fans. Umping was a cakewalk in comparison.

 

Within in the context of including my 1st post about it yes I do consider it tons easier. It is easier to get the calls right in basketball, I'm not commenting on the rest of it because the rest of it is completely subjective.

[trwi7]

I think this may be worse than Tim Welke missing the Helton call.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ4-XGiQURI

[dlk9s]

Helton's was way worse.

[owbc]

That was bad. I can see how the ump thought he went down with the ball. But he didn't have it in his glove when he got up--in fact some fan got the ball. Nice job selling it though.

[trwi7]

He was looking right at Wise when he went in the stands yet somehow couldn't see the ball go off the heel of his glove and bounce on the ground. Then he runs right past the guy who got the ball holding it high in the air.

[Baldkin]

"Show me you caught it." was always what I was told by umps when I used to play.

 

How can he call the guy out when Wise DOESN'T EVEN HAVE THE BALL!

[adamb100]

So not all umpires are evil. 1st base ump blows call, manager comes out to chat, home plate ump corrects the call.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=22931311&source=MLB&gid=2012_07_07_tbamlb_clemlb_1

[adambr2]

So not all umpires are evil. 1st base ump blows call, manager comes out to chat, home plate ump corrects the call.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=22931311&source=MLB&gid=2012_07_07_tbamlb_clemlb_1

 

I agree.

 

However, I think the fact that we are thoroughly impressed by an umpire who "swallowed his pride and asked the homeplate umpire if he had a better look", says just how embarrassing the state of MLB umpiring is.

 

It's a sad truth -- for most MLB umpires, salvaging their ego is more important than getting the call right. Glad to see at least with this guy, that wasn't the case.

[Nottso]

Let us hope it's contagious.

[JohnBriggs12]

Nothing bothers me more than officials in any sport that fail to see the big picture. I'm still bothered by how my very modest high school basketball career ended on an officials call, not coincidentally one that a future major league umpire was part of (I'll leave it to your imagination who that was, but think Oshkosh). Seems for a tournament game, someone supporting our team brought their elderly grandfather. The game was nip and tuck in the 4th quarter, and after a close call, the elderly gent with obviously not quite all his youthful faculties and who was seated in the front row due to is frail condition got up and protested by stepping on the court. Apparently feeling threatened by this 80 something year old frail man, the 30 something year old official issued a warning both to him and our bench that the next time it will result in a T!. You guessed it, with the score tied and well under a minute to play, a ball went out of bounds off our opponent and the ref missed the call. Up stood our senile fan to once again protest (on the opposite side of the court no less where we could not have stopped him) and boom, technical foul against us. They hit the free throw, and another when we now have to foul and we lose the game by 2 points, ending our seasons and our careers and leaving a bad taste in our mouth that lasts forever.

 

Our coach tried explaining all this to the officials, but they refused to reverse the call. Every time I see an official or an umpire lose perspective on a play it always brings me back to that time. It happened Saturday when the umpire misinterpreted Greinke's actions and tossed a starting pitcher in the first inning.

[Nottso]

The worst part of Greinke's ejection, and the aftermath, was the smug, self-satisfied smirk on the face of that ump. He appeared to be quite proud of himself.

[bani1717]

I'm still bothered by how my very modest high school basketball career ended on an officials call

 

That is crazy for a high school game. Standard high school rules don't even allow an official to give a technical foul to a fan - the only thing they can do them is have the fan ejected.

 

 

It happened Saturday when the umpire misinterpreted Greinke's actions and tossed a starting pitcher in the first inning.

 

I didn't see the play, but Greinke admitted after the fact that he shouldn't have spiked the ball and the he put his team in a bad spot:

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/161650595.html

"I don't blame the umpire for what he did. I didn't mean it toward him; I thought the guy was safe. But I shouldn't have done that."

 

Reading intentions isn't always easy, and when a player throws a tantrum on the field, they shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt IMO. Was it the wrong call to toss Greinke? Yes, but I'm not sure I'd classify it as an umpire losing perspective.

[thebruce44]

I'm still bothered by how my very modest high school basketball career ended on an officials call

 

That is crazy for a high school game. Standard high school rules don't even allow an official to give a technical foul to a fan - the only thing they can do them is have the fan ejected.

 

 

It happened Saturday when the umpire misinterpreted Greinke's actions and tossed a starting pitcher in the first inning.

 

I didn't see the play, but Greinke admitted after the fact that he shouldn't have spiked the ball and the he put his team in a bad spot:

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/161650595.html

"I don't blame the umpire for what he did. I didn't mean it toward him; I thought the guy was safe. But I shouldn't have done that."

 

Reading intentions isn't always easy, and when a player throws a tantrum on the field, they shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt IMO. Was it the wrong call to toss Greinke? Yes, but I'm not sure I'd classify it as an umpire losing perspective.

 

Batters throw their bats down and show emotion all the time and they aren't tossed unless they do it in the direction of the ump.

 

Their backs were to each other, no way Greinke should have been thrown and that has nothing to do with reading intention.

[GormanHarvey]

I'm still bothered by how my very modest high school basketball career ended on an officials call

 

That is crazy for a high school game. Standard high school rules don't even allow an official to give a technical foul to a fan - the only thing they can do them is have the fan ejected.

 

 

It happened Saturday when the umpire misinterpreted Greinke's actions and tossed a starting pitcher in the first inning.

 

I didn't see the play, but Greinke admitted after the fact that he shouldn't have spiked the ball and the he put his team in a bad spot:

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/161650595.html

"I don't blame the umpire for what he did. I didn't mean it toward him; I thought the guy was safe. But I shouldn't have done that."

 

Reading intentions isn't always easy, and when a player throws a tantrum on the field, they shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt IMO. Was it the wrong call to toss Greinke? Yes, but I'm not sure I'd classify it as an umpire losing perspective.

 

Batters throw their bats down and show emotion all the time and they aren't tossed unless they do it in the direction of the ump.

 

Their backs were to each other, no way Greinke should have been thrown and that has nothing to do with reading intention.

 

Not to mention, most umps will take into consideration the ramifications it has on a team when tossing their starting pitcher (let alone their ace!) 4 pitches into the game. It has a MUCH larger affect on a team than tossing a position player.

[bani1717]

Not to mention, most umps will take into consideration the ramifications it has on a team when tossing their starting pitcher (let alone their ace!) 4 pitches into the game. It has a MUCH larger affect on a team than tossing a position player.

 

Yes, it does have a much larger effect, but to me that's all the more reason for a pitcher to watch how he acts. A pitcher/ace shouldn't be allowed more leeway than a position player.

 

Long story short, I agree Greinke didn't deserve to be tossed, but like he said he did something stupid and it's hard to lay that on the umpire.

[thebruce44]

Not to mention, most umps will take into consideration the ramifications it has on a team when tossing their starting pitcher (let alone their ace!) 4 pitches into the game. It has a MUCH larger affect on a team than tossing a position player.

 

Yes, it does have a much larger effect, but to me that's all the more reason for a pitcher to watch how he acts. A pitcher/ace shouldn't be allowed more leeway than a position player.

 

Long story short, I agree Greinke didn't deserve to be tossed, but like he said he did something stupid and it's hard to lay that on the umpire.

 

I'm not saying an ace should be allowed more leeway than a position player. They should be allowed as much in my opinion, and Greinke wasn't. How can you not lay that on the umpire?