Replay Review, Your Table Is Ready: World Series Game 4 Preview, Yankees vs. Phillies, Sunday 11/1, 7:20 CT
by Al on Nov 1, 2009 11:00 AM CST
in Game Threads
100 comments
In a roundabout way, perhaps we can thank Fox-TV for the latest evidence that replay review is not only useful, but necessary in modern-day baseball.
Last night's hit to the deep right-field corner by Alex Rodriguez, correctly ruled a home run after replay review, hit a TV camera that would not have been there during the regular season. The umpires had discussed this before the game had even begun:
Umpiring crew chief Gerry Davis said that the umpires had already determined while inspecting Citizens Bank Park prior to the game that a ball hitting the camera would be a home run. "Because we cannot control what the cameraman does with the camera, one of the specific ground rules is when the ball hits the camera, home run," he said.
And that made it easy. Four of the six umpires left the field; Fox showed all of us the monitor (geez, could they have made it any smaller?) on which the umpires review the play, and after a delay shorter than the ones in which Fox shows us those endlessly repetitive and ridiculous Blackberry ads, they returned, correctly calling it a home run. The Gordon Edes Yahoo column linked above quotes baseball's fearful leader:
Even as his umpires have come under unprecedented fire this October, baseball commissioner Bud Selig said he is reluctant to expand the use of replay.
"The more baseball people I talk to, there is a lot of trepidation about it and I think their trepidation is fair," Selig said in New York Tuesday. "I don’t want to overreact. You can make light of that but when you start to think you’re going to have more intrusions, it’s something that you have to be very careful about. Affecting the game on the field is not something I really want to do."
You don't want to affect the game on the field? You mean, you'd rather have your umpires make wrong calls, take hits and possibly runs and wins away from teams, and apologize profusely later, than get it right with a minimum of fuss? What kind of idiotic thinking is this?
Replay review is used in the three other major sports, with zero ill effects and, generally, praise for getting calls right. There is NO reason not to use it in baseball for everything except ball and strike calls (mostly because doing that would slow the game down untenably). This is particularly true since the current system of home run replay is not only used as it was last night, but also to determine, if questionable, whether a ball that has HR distance is fair or foul. How is this different than reviewing whether Joe Mauer's hit in Yankee Stadium in the division series is fair or foul? Why do one and not the other?
My proposal, which I know has been echoed or expanded on by many others here, is after the jump.
Each manager gets two "red flag" challenges to rulings on the field, which would be limited to: home runs, fair/foul calls, safe/out rulings, and trapped/caught fly balls or line drives. The red flag must be thrown before the next pitch; managers would have to make sure they pay close attention to questionable calls so they could throw the flag quickly. A fifth umpire would be stationed in the press box for review; this umpire would be part of the regular rotation of the crew, giving every umpire an every-5th-game break from field duty, and would also serve as official scorer. After the 7th inning of every game, the red flag system is eliminated and all close plays of this type are subject to mandatory review (similar to the NFL's mandatory review in the last two minutes). Just as in NFL review, replays would have to show conclusive evidence to overturn the ruling on the field.
I just don't see how anyone could be against a system like this. It gets things right; it does not unduly delay games (most games would have none of these, and even if all four manager challenges are used, you're talking about maybe two minutes per delay, eight minutes a game); it provides 15 more full-time umpiring jobs; and it would virtually eliminate manager ejections and suspensions (the time wasted in manager/umpire arguments has to be longer than any time that would be spent on review).
Wake up, Bud, and get it done. It's way past time.
Yankees at Phillies, 7:20 pm CDT. Yankees lead series 2-1. TV: Fox. Announcers: Joe Buck and Tim McCarver.
Baseball-reference.com game preview
Please visit our SB Nation Phillies site The Good Phight and Yankees site Pinstripe Alley.
Discuss amongst yourselves.
0 recs |
100 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
maybe
someone should remind Bud that the game doesn’t belong to “baseball people” whatever that means, it’s for the fans and the fans want to see games played with as few bad calls as possible.
I cannot WAIT for that man to leave office.
by CalCalender on Nov 1, 2009 11:04 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Hear, hear.
Without us “paying customers”, whether that money is going for tickets or souvenirs or watching on cable, satellite or online, without us, Bud’s a car dealer in Milwaukee.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 1, 2009 11:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Aren't there still a few teams that don't televise 100% of their games?
I’m sure there are still cameras there just wondering if there would be less chance for as many camera angles. I agree there should be expanded use of replay. Anything but balls and strikes.
by LT on Nov 1, 2009 11:04 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Obviously, you'd have to then have a TV crew at every game.
There aren’t many games that aren’t televised by at least one of the teams involved. I don’t have an exact count — anyone know?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 1, 2009 11:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't remember any games listed as unavailable to view on MLB.TV or DirecTV last year
"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root
by Clutch16 on Nov 1, 2009 2:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There were definately games unavailable on DirecTV
Including a few Cubs games but that was obvioulsy a contract issue. I think it happens when only local TV broadcast
(say WGN) is available and DirecTV does not carry them so if you had a case where neither team had cable broadcast under contract it got skipped,
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 1, 2009 4:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure, but I think there might have been one Sox game last year that wasn't televised
It was a Saturday afternoon game that was NOT picked up by Fox (probably because the Cubs were) but because it was during the Fox exclusive window, CSN/WGN/WCIU could not televise it. Then again, I thought all the Saurday Sox home games were at 6 so they could have fireworks afterwards. Maybe the good Doctor can chime in here.
Regardless, I think this would be the scenario to be concerned about – non Fox televised games played during Fox’s exclusive broadcast window (which I assume is roughly 3-6pm Central, Saturdays).
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 1, 2009 4:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you're right...
…. there are a handful of such games, mostly on the West Coast if one of the West Coast teams isn’t deemed worthy of Foxness on Saturday.
They’d have to send a MLB.com crew to do those games, as they do occasionally during spring training. Or, adjust the schedule so that no non-Fox games are played during the 3-6 pm Central time exclusive Fox window.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 2, 2009 8:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would like to see something done about the balls and strikes as well.
I am not sure how to do it but each umpire has his own version of the strike zone and rarely is the higher part called. I know it takes away from the sacred human element of the game but how much longer do teams have to put up with moving strike zones everyday, when technology to make things better is available.
Bud needed to go a LONG time ago…….
by TJ11 on Nov 1, 2009 11:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The strike zone issue...
… could only be resolved by having all balls & strikes called by technology. I’m not sure I’d want that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 1, 2009 11:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I just get frustrated watching strike zones get smaller when an umpire is pissed at a pitcher or watching someone who has a reputation for having a good eye get the benefit of the doubt on obvious strikes.
I think the umpires should be held much more accountable. This post season has been horrible for them. The silver lining may be improved replay…. That’s if bud would every wake up.
by TJ11 on Nov 1, 2009 11:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
There’s no doubt, the umpires need to be held accountable, and told that they aren’t the show, the players are. I think too many umpires want to be seen on ESPN or the MLB Network.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Nov 1, 2009 11:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree...
…and I think this is the area were major league umpires have gone downhill for several years now.
I’m not in favor of using technology for balls and strikes during a game, but it should certainly be used as a training tool so umpires can come to understand where they are missing pitches.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Nov 2, 2009 9:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutley Not!
Fair or foul, okay. Safe or out, okay. Homer or not, okay. Balls and strikes, absolutley not.
Each umpire has his own strike zone, Each league is known as a high or low ball league. Each pitcher and catcher has to learn the umpires as well as the batters. Each umpire has to learn each batter.
Do the Greg Maddux’s of the world get a ball called their way every now and then because of their reputation of notoriety? Sure, but arguably, they’ve earned it over the course of a career.
Are there makeup calls? You bet, because the umps know when they blow a ball or strike call.
With very little thought we could go on and on. I really think it would be a knee jerk reaction to have replay or electronic ball and strike calls. It would take a game of nuance and boil it down to no more than a video game. No thanks on ball and strike automation or replay.
And so it goes.
by Luigi on Nov 1, 2009 6:24 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I know it'd probably cause more trouble, but...
…I wish they’d have had something like that for balls and strikes during the ‘98 playoffs. Maddux knew he’d get the off-the-plate-strike-calls, so he kept pitching there and the Cubs couldn’t do anything about it. I remember Mickey Morandini taking a couple of called strikes that were clearly outside, looking at the ump in disbelief, and then hacking uselessly at the last one for a weak groundout or something, because what else could he do?
That really ticked me off…
by jdb-44 on Nov 2, 2009 10:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I want it now !!!
…they better get it before my team goes to WS….after waiting all this time I dont think I could handle seeing a crappy call go against them….
by cooliogirl47 on Nov 1, 2009 11:35 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
chances are...
the call would go the Cubs way first, then would be reversed against ’em.
I think I speak for everyone here when I say, "Wait, what the hell are you talking about?"
by Ross on Nov 1, 2009 8:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
sorry
I think I may have flagged you by mistake…..what I wanted to say was that I could handle the reversal IF it was the right call….what I couldn’t handle would be to see the call in the replay go against the Cubs and nothing done about it…..It would just be unbearable.
by cooliogirl47 on Nov 1, 2009 8:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't like mandatory review after the 7th
I understand why people might want it, but it would all but remove any strategy from the Manager as to when would be a good time to challenge. If I’m a manager and say there’s a close call at first in the 3rd inning, why wouldn’t I challenge? Even if I doubt my runner was safe, there’s no reason not to challenge since I don’t have to worry about a blown call in the later innings. I think mandatory review might make sense in extra innings, maybe, but certainly not in the regulatory 9. Even in extra innings I think it removes a lot of strategy.
Plus, there would really need to be a penalty for challenging calls that stand. If not, you will likely see the maximum number of challenges in virtually every single game. Because, why wouldn’t you challenge? Unless the game is a blowout, a manager is always going to challenge a close call not gone his way to give his team the best chance to win. Taking 4 extra game breaks for replays isn’t a ton of time, likely less than 10 minutes total, but just think about it. I know I’d get annoyed if there were 4 extra pitching changes in every single game, which is basically what this would equate to.
I think each manager gets one challenge per game, and if the call is overturned in that manager’s favor, a byproduct of the ruling is that the manager is rewarded with another challenge. That way, you can deter managers from using it unless they are really sure, while you still protect them from having multiple wrong calls gone against them.
And to make things quicker, there is absolutely no reason why any of the umpires need to leave the field of play. Challenge is called, the crew chief defers to the 5th umpire (also the scorer) for a review that shouldn’t take much more the 30 seconds. But I really don’t see MLB doing something as intelligent as installing a 5th arbiter as the scorer/reviewer, if they do implement replay, I have little doubt that it’d be the same system that they have now for HR replays.
by WittyUserName on Nov 1, 2009 11:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Good Points
I agree with pretty much everything you proposed in here.
Additionally, watching Gameday and playoff TV presentations that make use of ball/strike grids, I’m not sure I’d even against eliminating umpire ball/strike calls altogether.
by WiscCubsFan on Nov 1, 2009 3:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
5th umpire
I agree with having a 5th umpire in the booth, especially giving that person the official scorer duty as well. The current system of home town official scorers leads to inconsistent scoring.
But I don’t agree with the concept of when to use a challenge as part of the manager’s strategy. Give the power to the 5th umpire. At their discretion, they can overrule the call on the field. Anytime. First inning, after the 7th, whenever.
The NHL uses this for goals. Any question, it is reviewed. No challenge by coaches, just an honest effort to get the call right.
It’s not like there are a lot of disputed plays during a game that lasts around 3 hours. Maybe 1-3 times per game the umpire in the booth signals to the crew chief or home plate umpire the call is being overturned and announces the rationale.
by cliff on Nov 2, 2009 9:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I vehemently disagree
Then what would be the point of having umpires on the field at all other than calling the strike zone? The only nicety of having the umps on the field would be for quicker calls, that’s it.
What then happens to the ‘in the vicinity’ rule enforced on double plays? Or the standard of ‘If the throw beats him he’s almost certainly out’ calls. Would those unwritten rules be tossed aside because the umpire in the booth is overturning them because they are technically wrong.
I think you underestimate just how many plays, and how many parts of plays, would be constantly reviewed, thus creating routine 4 hour games. Every single close play at first would need to be reviewed under this system. Every single one. That is nuts. Say a runner beats the throw at first by a .001 of a second, and is called, correctly on the field, safe. Does the 5th ump in the booth then need to pause action on the field for 30 seconds while he watches the replay(s) to ensure that the runner was, in fact, safe? I’m sorry but that is ludicrous.
Challenging the umps should be a strategic tool. Yes, the goal is the get all the calls right. But basically handing all but the strike zone over to a replay package is completely overkill. Such a system would be exactly what Selig is wary of, a complete overhaul of the way the game is currently played. Seriously, I think if a 5th ump had to ensure that EVERY play was 100% correct before play could resume, 4 hour games would become routine, and you’d likely see some 5 hour games creep into the mix as well.
I honestly think that the system I proposed is as good as humanly possible.
by WittyUserName on Nov 2, 2009 10:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Al, I am in favor of your version of instant replay.
It is way past time that baseball instituted some form of replay. As these playoffs have shown, replay needs to be put in place to prevent wrong calls. The series this year have been full of bad calls.
The only drawback to replay is that C.B. Bucknor would be out of a job soon.
One question: would there be some sort of time limit on how long replays would take? I think around two minutes per challenge or replay would be fine.
And lastly, who are these “baseball people” Bad Selig has spoken to? The baseball people I have spoken to are all in favor of instant replay in baseball. Wake up, Bad Selig, and realize your sport needs to move into the 21st Century!
Ready 4 Revenge against The Traitor!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Nov 1, 2009 11:55 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Re: C.B. Bucknor.
Wait, did I say “drawback” there? I meant “best thing that could happen”.
Ready 4 Revenge against The Traitor!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Nov 1, 2009 11:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"baseball people" => Alexander Cartwright, Albert Spalding, Kenesaw Landis, Abner Doubleday...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 1, 2009 4:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm in favor of instant replay, but...
One problem area is what to do with overturned calls that affect player reactions during live play. Take, for example, Ryan Howard’s catch in game 2 that was called an out even though the ball bounced off the dirt and into his glove. After fielding Damon’s hit, Howard threw to Rollins at second (ostensibly because he didn’t think it was an out) to get Posada, while Cabrera moved on to third. Rollins then noticed that the ump at first called it a line out, so he tagged Cabrera for the inning-ending double play.
How should a situation like this be handled with replay? First, there’s the question of whether Howard heard/saw the ump’s call, or if the ump made the call loudly/clearly enough. (If Howard really though he caught the ball for a line out, why didn’t he just step on first to finish the double play?) If Howard’s catch is ruled not an out, what do you do with the baserunners? His throw to Rollins was wide, so Posada would be safe. Damon then made it to first, so he would be safe.
But if the catch had not been called an out to begin with, perhaps Howard would have trotted to first base for the sure out. Or maybe he would have thrown to second without hesitation and gotten Posada out? If the line-out call is overturned, do you rule Damon out a first on the presumption that Howard could have easily stepped on the base for an out? You can’t really send Damon back to the plate for a re-do.
Again, I strongly support the expanded use of replay, but there are situations like this where it could get quite messy. At the very least, some clear rule would need to be established for how to judge “what would have happened” during live play if the incorrect call had been made correctly.
by cwpettis on Nov 1, 2009 1:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Good point - The implementation could be very difficult...
Nonetheless, anything which can be done to improve the quality of the calls made, should be done. As long as the “soul” of the game is not changed by the replay rules, I would tend to agree with the introduction of some form of “instant” umpire auditing.
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
by eths on Nov 1, 2009 1:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't throw around this word often
but I hate Bud Selig. I just don’t understand how this moron has kept his job as long as he has. He’s clueless, plain and simple, is a good ol’ boy, and won’t change for anything. I despise his existence, and when he’s gone, whether it’s from baseball or just in general, I will not care one bit for him.
www.facebook.com/craighudak
by Craig in South Bend on Nov 1, 2009 2:21 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
Hmmmm...that's, um, strange bolding.
Don’t know how that happened.
www.facebook.com/craighudak
by Craig in South Bend on Nov 1, 2009 2:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Open tags are not your friend
"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root
by Clutch16 on Nov 1, 2009 2:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
SBN is beta-testing a special Bud Bold filter - any negative remarks about Selig are automatically bolded.
Works for me… ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 1, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Bud Selig is a jerk.
Here’s a good commentary piece in the KC Star today, dealing with the lateness of the season into November.
Baseball has stretched this far into the fall only once before, in 2001, and that was because the regular season stopped for a week after 9/11.
And again:
The start of this year’s World Series came on Oct. 28. Before this season, every World Series except 2001 was completed on or before Oct. 28.
Can you believe that!!
Also, look at that Selig quote again:
“I don’t want to overreact. You can make light of that but when you start to think you’re going to have more intrusions, it’s something that you have to be very careful about. Affecting the game on the field is not something I really want to do.”
What the hell is he talking about? This quote makes NO F-ING SENSE. Affect the game? You already cancelled an All-Star game. Please, all the guys n gals that are trepid to instant replay (or changing the playoff format, for that matter, because let’s be honest here, Bud Selig is wrong when it comes to both instant replay AND the current playoff system), would you please stand up? Where do these people exist and reside? Are they the same persons that won’t vote for Zach Greinke for the Cy Young in 2009 because he was on a shitty team? The same ones that won’t vote a person 100% into the HOF simply because they don’t think anybody should receive 100% of the vote? I hope they are all on the last tick of their Doomsday Clock.
Dan
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 2:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Good replay proposal by Al.
I’d do away with the red flags, though, and have the 5th umpire determine which calls are reviewed and reversed. Also, any on-field discussion initiated after the ruling on replay would cause an automatic expulsion for the manager, coach or player involved. That way the game will move along. The flags limit the times review is used. I wouldn’t limit review if I want every wrong call to be corrected.
by Fraggin Judge on Nov 1, 2009 3:29 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
it'll eventually happen because its the Yankees
That’s the reason we got replay for home run calls. I remember there was a controversial call in a Mets-Yankees game on Sunday night concerning a home run call which caused ESPN to (obviously) cause the situation to explode, resulting in instant replay.
I'm a lefty, maybe Lou should give me a shot for a position in the bullpen!!
by Chanman25 on Nov 1, 2009 4:01 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
so if a call goes against the yankees we'll have red flags?
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 1, 2009 4:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Only if there is debris on the field and the pace golf cart comes out
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
by eths on Nov 1, 2009 4:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
did you not watch that ALCS game against the Angels
where ESPN was constantly talking about those blown calls in that game?
I'm a lefty, maybe Lou should give me a shot for a position in the bullpen!!
by Chanman25 on Nov 1, 2009 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What in the world is with this movie refence by FOX???
Just not right.
Ready 4 Revenge against The Traitor!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Nov 1, 2009 7:03 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Starting Joe Blanton in the World Series is like starting Jason Marquis in the World Series.
The former, ERA+ of 102; the latter, 98.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:03 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
A-Rod was just hit on purpose. NOW I SEE WHY BLANTON IS STARTING!
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, great strategy
Load the bases with a runner on first and less than two out. Textbook baseball.
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 7:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There was a man on third.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Even less of a reason to load the bases
A walk scores a run. Why would you hit him on purpose?!?!?!?
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 8:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There was a man on third. Not a man on second. Not a man on first. A man on third, like I said.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 8:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought I don't know was on third?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 1, 2009 8:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
sorry
Damon on second, Jeter on third — still not a situation to load the bases with one out.
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 8:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Odd that the umpires warn both benches right away; CC gets no chance to retaliate.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Ned Yost is not a manager in this series
Therefore the idea of retaliation is not on the plate.
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 7:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ugly Game
I think I will go see what rerun TBS has.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 1, 2009 7:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
It's the first inning Jessica.
There’s 26 outs left.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I just realized DESPERATE HOUSWIVES starts in 20 minutes
That works for me. I will check score of course.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 1, 2009 7:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Argh Jessica!
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I ALWAYS channel surf.
It is just a question of degree. I love DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 1, 2009 7:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Opposed to TV replay in any case
I think those supporting instant replay don’t understand how this changes the game. Allowing replays undermines the integrity of the umpire. Keep it between the lines.
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 7:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
...or enhances the correctness of the game.
It would be the umpires tool; it would make them only more accurate.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Then just replace the umpires with television
Use the K zone for balls and strikes. Is that a game you want to see?
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 7:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
First, I said nothing about the strike zone. That part of an umpire's job is much more intimately tied to their job description than is ensuring a ball is fair/foul/homer, or a player is safe/out.
This is about ensuring the calls made during the course of a game are in fact correct ones. The plate umpire has always been intimately tied to the ebb and flow of the game; that is, a cocky pitcher mouthing off, the tightening or loosing of a strike zone, etc. That should not be ever made mechanical.
However, when dealing with plays outside of the batter’s box, the umpires feelings are irrelevant. I could give two shits about what NBA or NFL or MLB umpires and referees think and feel. Their job is to call their sport as fair and just as possible. The addition of technology moves their job closer to this. I don’t remember reading stories about NFL or NBA officials having low self-efficacy scores post-instant replay introductions.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
correctness
If that’s the goal, then computers will be more correct and you can take the umpires off the field. We’ve seen many more wrong ball/strike calls than calls “outside the box” and they’ve had just as much impact on the game. Introducing instant replay has set a slippery slope from which we may never recover.
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 8:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong. We can agree to disagree.
MLB will never replace home plate umpires with computers. Just like the NFL wouldn’t replace its officials with computers that measure inches for each yard gained.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 8:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
sounds like we agree
that correctness is not the ultimate goal — we differ on the degree
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 8:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, that's not it at all.
There is a gigantic differences between replacing umpires and adding to their value.
Replacing home plate umpires with computers changes the dimension of the game. Apart of the rules of the game include having a man behind the plate calling the pitches. This is integral to the game, absolutely integral.
Adding technologies that allow for umpires to be more accurate and correct only enhances their skill set.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 8:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But you negate the human element
If you use technology to overrule every incorrect call, what’s the difference in using technology to make those calls in the first place?
by DaveinHouston on Nov 1, 2009 9:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You're not overruling it.
You’re confirming it. In most NFL situations (I’m having a hard time fact-find this, but I have heard this statistic before), the person and computer are in agreement.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 9:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
it wouldn’t be every incorrect call….i would assume replay use would be limited.
by cooliogirl47 on Nov 2, 2009 9:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ridiculous change-up by CC makes Raul look like a Little Leaguer.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 7:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Great idea except for the scorer bit ...
Leave the official scorers out of this. Scorers aren’t umpires, and umpires aren’t scorers. The jobs are very different. Leave them separate.
I think I speak for everyone here when I say, "Wait, what the hell are you talking about?"
by Ross on Nov 1, 2009 8:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
RYAN HOWARD WITH THE HUSTLE! UNHOOKIN’ THE PLOW!
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 8:36 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Howard never touched the plate
Girardi should throw the red flag…oh wait…
by va cubsfan on Nov 1, 2009 8:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
God that was awesome.
MACK TRUCK, COMIN’ THRU!!
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 8:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Correct me if I'm wrong,
But did Posada just walk out to the mound twice, without a pitch thrown in between his visits? And if so, is that legal in the baseball rule book?
Ready 4 Revenge against The Traitor!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Nov 1, 2009 9:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
BOOM GOES THE DYNAMITE
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 9:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Ryan Howard is gonna jack one right now.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 9:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
well atleast he didnt strike out...
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 1, 2009 9:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think I’d like Nick Swisher if he was on the Cubs.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 10:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
NEW BALLGAME, FOLKS!
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 10:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Joba makes everybody look ridiculous.
Then Feliz catches a break and clobbers the crap outta the ball into left center.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 10:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
joba is one of the most overrated pitchers in the game
dont tell blou i said that
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 1, 2009 10:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
He had an ERA+ of 1192 in 2007. Yes, one-thousand ninety-two.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 10:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i take my statement back!
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 1, 2009 10:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
just give the yankees the trophy
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 1, 2009 10:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Well I’m done here. Good night, Jesus.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Nov 1, 2009 10:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
that was a very cub esque way of ending the game
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 1, 2009 10:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately, you're right
Good job, New York. If you didn’t win after getting all those high priced free agents, it would have been the worst sort of fail imaginable.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
by Ace Venom on Nov 1, 2009 11:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Lidge is a day late turning into a pumpkin
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 1, 2009 11:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Egads Phillies - You gotta get your act together!
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
by eths on Nov 2, 2009 4:49 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Heads up play...
…by Damon to take 3rd on that steal in the ninth.
Unfortuanately, I don’t think the Cubs have a player who would have had the instincts to make the play Damon did there.
Also, this was one of those “intangable” plays that may have impacted the rest of the inning. First of all, Lidge loves getting guys to chase his slider in the dirt and with a man on third (instead of 2nd), he is less prone to throw that pitch with the fear of a wild pitch. Rodriquez got a nice fastball, and the game was over at that point for all intents and purposes.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Nov 2, 2009 11:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I could see Lee or Dome doing that...
but I imagine he had his sights on 2 bases before he stole second.
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
by IowaCubs- on Nov 2, 2009 12:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's been a very entertaining series so far...
I was fearing something more ho-hum, but it’s been great. I just hope it goes to seven games and the Phillies pull it off, but that seems unlikely at this point.
I hope Mo Rivera gets some WS MVP votes, especially after that 6 inning save the other night.
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
by IowaCubs- on Nov 2, 2009 12:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Recent Stories in Game Threads
SBNation.com Recent Stories
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- After locking up of AL MVP, it's time for Twins to lock up Mauer
- November means R&R for Raiders fan CC Sabathia and others
- D12: Honeymoon over for big Bobby Jenks and Ozzie Guillen?
- Timmy is so wicked: Lincecum's hair grows with his legend
- D12: Strasburg feels 'pop' in knee, scares Nationals to death
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
