I love the nostalgia of baseball as much as anyone. I respect the tradition and the history of the game as if it was part my families, and in a large way it is. I’m sure many people in this country share the same sentiment. As a whole, we’re reluctant to change. We protect it. There’s this mentality that if it was good enough for generations past, then it should be good enough for us. I’m here to tell you this line of thinking is faulty, it’s bred through ignorance instead of logical reasoning.
There are plenty of things about the game that should never be changed regardless of the advancements that technology affords us. Giving the umpires a little help judging whether a ball is fair or foul isn’t one of those untouchable areas. Believe me, if Commissioner Landis would have had the means available to deploy a replay booth on the field, he would have. Anyone would, anyone with half a brain, at least. In this day-in-age it’s preposterous that there isn’t a system in place by now. We live in a society that can transfer songs through mid-air, without cords, yet our national past-time is stuck in an era where the phonograph was the music player of choice. At the end of the day it’s the commissioner’s duty to make sure that the game is played and officiated fairly, within reason.
So please, feel free to explain to me what’s fair and equal about a team being robbed of a victory due to a botched call. People like to say these things have a way of evening out, but they shouldn’t have to play the odds. Say what you want about taking the human element out of the game, but sometimes being human just isn’t good enough. As a Cardinals fan, there’s nothing at all to like about the fallible Don Denkinger. In case you’re unaware, Denkinger is the poster boy for this argument. He’s infamous for making the most controversial call in the history of the World Series. In the ninth inning of Game 6 of the 1985 Series replays showed Todd Worrell beat the Royals’ Jorge Orta to the bag by at least a step yet Denkinger called him safe. The Royals, recognizing the immediacy of the situation, rally to score two-runs, and then win again the next night to seal the title. I guarantee that Denkinger, knowing firsthand the backlash involved in blowing a call in such a high stakes situation, would give anything to go back and get that call right. Instead he lives forever in discussions such as this and in replay loops on ESPN Classic.
In a split second the history of the game was forever altered. Just like it was when Umpire Tim McClelland called Matt Holliday safe on a play at the plate in last season’s wild card playoff game. The replays clearly show that Michael Barrett blocked the plate as Holliday slid in headfirst, yet the Rockies were given the game. There’s nothing saying that the Padres or Cardinals would have won if the proper calls would have been made, but at the same time there’s nothing saying they wouldn’t have either. The point is, especially in last year’s case where the technology was readily available, that we shouldn’t have to debate it.
Whether you like it or not it’s coming, starting in the Arizona Fall Leage and then next March in the WBC. The question now is how it should be implemented. The people against Instant Replay argue that it would slow down the game, which I disagree with. We aren’t talking about football here; you don’t have to see the play from 100 different angels to get it right. In most cases you can see what really happened after one take, the reason the umpires get it wrong so often is that they are out of position or their view becomes obstructed when the play unfolds in front of them. When this happens, all it would take is for the umpire on the field to raise his arm and have the guy in the booth watching the game give him the right call, chances are it would never take more than 30 seconds. Here’s the thing, traditionalists, you don’t even need to worry about this yet.
The plan right now is to have replay only on controversial homerun calls. After the three botched calls last week the need has never been more apparent. How can anyone blame the Ump’s in any of these cases, though? All the calls were almost impossible to make. The first one came Saturday in New York, where a shot to left by Carlos Delgado was originally called fair, only to have the original – and correct- call overturned. The Next night a blast by Geovany Soto was ruled to be in play, when in fact it was a homer. He ended up turning the botched call into an inside the parker, but that’s irrelevant. Then finally, on Wednesday, Alex Rodriguez was given a double after a ball he hit bounced off the staircase behind the fence and landed back on the field. From 200 feet away it’s easy to get them wrong, especially when you’re talking about the difference of inches. Those inches, though, can decide the outcome of a game.
Granted, if things go nice and smooth with the homerun calls the use of instant replay should begin to inundate other facets of the game. If done tactfully it should be a seamless integration. The traditionalist inside of me really doesn’t want to see it go much further than this, though. I’d hate to see a situation where the managers would get the power to put a play under the microscope, that’s something that undoubtedly would slow down the game. The only time that a play should be subject to review is if a call comes in from the booth, whether it happens to be from an umpire on site or someone calls it in from the MLB office, like they handle it in the NHL.
Also, there is this huge fear that this will eventually lead to balls and strikes being subject to review. I hope that Selig isn’t this stupid. If the QuesTec technology were used to determine balls and strikes during the game, then yes, I’d be one of the people outside of the MLB offices in New York with a picket sign. If we were to start going to both for balls and strikes, the game would be ruined. You can’t remove the human element from this aspect of the game. Its part of the strategy, the way a pitcher and hitter adapt to the strike zone is one of the key fundamentals of the game. Calling a homerun isn’t. An injustice shouldn’t control a team’s fate, especially in the playoffs.
I wonder if anyone freaked out when they introduced the photo finish to horse racing?
RSS Updates
Email Updates
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Many issues with this, a good number of which I deal with at my blog — http://fivetooltool.blogspot.com/2008/05/rage-against-non-machine-umpire.html
— but I’ll add a little more to the fire here, as per request.
1) If the plays are impossible to call, why is it happening now, when it really didn’t happen very often just, say, last year? The parks are the same. Home runs are down. It’s random chance.
2) Injustice? It’s baseball. There’s no justice. If there was, Jeffrey Loria would be burning in hell, rather than shining a World Series trophy and looking at his first place team.
3) “If done tactfully.” What MLB have you been watching? Tact doesn’t come into play with these hamfisted fools. Name me a tactful decision by MLB in the Budny Selig era.
4) Why is the human element on home runs not OK, but balls and strikes isn’t? If you’re going to use tech to try to get big calls correct, isn’t a 3-2 called strike to end the ninth inning in a one-run game (with bases loaded, just to up the ante) more important than a home run call that might be in a blowout?
See, once you open the door to one thing, you more or less have to open it to all, or you get nonstop puling of when and where to use it, along with the delays that the game really doesn’t need. It’s like being a little bit pregnant.
1. What baseball have you been watching? Umpires have been botching home run calls forever, just not so much in bunches. You probably just didn’t pay attention, or didn’t file it into your memory. It was just never big news until it happened in both New York locations days apart.
2. Yea, yea, I agree Loria is a scum bag. But when a guy hits the ball over the fence, he hits it over the fence. The umpires shouldn’t have the power to make that call, or take it away.
3. Bud has made some mistakes, and he’s also made some good moves. He’s smart enough here to know there are limits. This is the guy that wants to speed things up, not slow them down.
4. Because on home runs it’s cut and dry, the ball goes over the fence, it goes over the fence. A guy beats a guy to first, he beats him to first, there should really be no debate on these issues, either it is or isn’t. Dealing with an umpire who can’t get these calls right isn’t part of the strategy of the game, it’s BS.
At home plate, this is a big part of the game. It’s part of the psychological game between pitcher and hitter. It’s also too much to review, come on bro, baseball knows it can’t have 200-300 hundred pitches under review. The Ump is the judge and jury here.
It’d ruin the game to have balls and strikes under review, where as home runs and plays at the bases should be right all the time, to miss these calls when a ball goes over the fence is an injustice. You shouldn’t be able to take something from someone that they earned. These things don’t even out, they decide the outcome of the game. Whereas the strikezone is the same for both sides, so it does even out, they are dealing with the same playing field there.
Hi Nick.
Firstly, I found your site through your comments over at PB and I am so glad I stopped by to check it out. Awesome!!!
In relation to the article I will draw reference to a number of issues that we have been debating in the UK regarding replays. Ever since England beat Germany in the ‘66 world cup final and that highly famous goal by Geoff Hurst hit the crossbar and bounced down onto, or over, the line depending on which tem you support, we have been having the debate about replays in football (Soccer to you). while I agree that there is nothing either fair or equal about your team being robbed by a bad call, it does lend itself to the major talking points after the game. Did he didn’t he, was it a penalty or wasn’t it. I have watched many a replay with friends and there are some calls that are just too tough to make in that game. the other issue is that of stopping the game in play to review replays…..will it kill the game? Now I know baseball is entirely different and you have the time to stop and check, very much the same as in cricket (where the third umpire is called upon often to settle the deabte ‘was he in or out’) and for that reason alone I would say that it would be a good thing for the game. The only thing is that you cannot afford to let replays control the game. I don’t know about anyone else, but some of the greatest sporting events I have ever seen has been emboiled by some form of post match debate. I would hate for this part of ‘the game’ to be lost so use it but dont rely on it is all I would say.
The main thing is, with the replay, is like you said, there is time in baseball. The fact is, when there is a questionable call, coaches and umps waste a ton of time arguing about who is right and wrong. In baseball, after looking at something in slow motion while zoomed in, it’s very, very easy to to see what really happened. So in essence, by having home runs reviewable, the game would actually speed up by circumventing all the nonsense that takes place.
That’s true Nick, we agree that it’s workable in baseball without upsetting the crowd too much…… But other than homeruns, what other decisions would you have the replays decide? Anything in and around the homeplate? all descisions? Would you have coach challenges like the NFL? I’d like to hear the umps view on this subject!
To agree that it would be good for the game is one thing, to outline the ins and outs of how to implement it best is a whole nother ball game!
I believe that the plan is just do homeruns, which will start in the Arizona fall league. And there has also been whispers of making ‘game changing’ plays at the plate reviewable.
Yes, replay makes people happy thing. I like it.
Leave a Comment