Baseball umps cite HDTV, SportsCenter for changing the way games are called
By Richard Lawler 
posted July 10th 2009 1:09PM
posted July 10th 2009 1:09PM
posted July 10th 2009 1:09PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
OUT!
Replay is always a good thing in my book.
What's interesting is that baseball DOES have a replay review. The catch? They won't review a play unless a manager comes out and contests the issue. Which to me, seems stupid. Either you're committed to replay and ensuring the quality of calls, or you're not. To hang the issue in limbo and require a manager to come out and stop play before you attempt to utilize it is a waste of effort. It's different from football and the red flag or coach's challenge b/c while certain plays do require coach's to stop play and object, at least they continue to review each play under most circumstances.
Ascian what are you talking about? Your totally WRONG. Replay can ONLY be determined by the Umpire and it can ONLY happen in 3 scenarios.
1) Home Run Calls (If fair or foul)
2) Whether the ball actually left the playing field
3) Whether the ball was subject to fan interference
There is no need for instant replay in baseball. We got by just fine without it for more than 130 years.
In that case you better get rid of your computer, car, and A/C, because people got by communicating, traveling, and living in warm climates for much longer than that before those things came around. The fact that things have existed for a long time doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't be improved.
I agree, keep it out. Maybe I am a bit of a old school baseball kind of guy (even if I am only 27), i like going to Wrigly Field cause of that old stadium feel and whatnot. If I want the glitz and glamour, I'd go to the movie theatre.
It's 'America's favorite past time' not 'America's bleeding edge sports game'.
Shannon and Hirschbeck seem to be pretty bang-on right in their realization that television exposure does create a higher standard for getting each and every call right. While the current HR / fair-or-foul / fan interference replay system seems to be a necessary evil for ensuring the accuracy of "boundary" plays, introducing a wholesale instant replay system is not really conducive to maintaining the rhythm and, some would argue, the humanity of the game. Rather, greater accountability is needed to ensure that consistency and accuracy among umpires is recognized, while the inconsistent umpires are weeded out of the game, rather than just being generally accepted as "not one of the better ball-and-strike guys."
Accountability is also an absolute necessity to deal with the other side of the "exposure" question, which is the exposure of the umpires themselves. It seems that quite a few of the umpires - particularly some of the younger ones - seem to be obsessed with the idea of "making a name for themselves" or, quite simply, seeing their own face on TV. Quick ejections, instigating arguments, baiting players or managers, and exaggerated reactions to slight or non-existent contact - an umpire's equivalent to an NBA- or FIFA-caliber flop - have all become decidedly more common in an era of 24 hour sports coverage. While players involved in minor (or even perceived) incidents earn an immediate suspension from MLB, the only public disciplinary action taken against an umpire that I'm aware of in recent years was the suspension of Mike Winters for 5 games for baiting Milton Bradley in an incident that resulted in a season-ending injury to Bradley's knee. While I realize that disciplinary action regarding the umpires has always been regarded as a league or union issue, thus not a public matter, the current state of the game and coverage of the game calls for more transparency from MLB (specifically Selig and Manfred) and the umpires' union.
I don't think making the slowest moving major sport even slower moving is a good idea.
Replay ruined football for me. Don't let it ruin baseball. Keep it minimal, and ONLY at the umpires' discretion -- coaches should have zero right to demand a reply.
If replay ruined football for you, you were never a fan of football to begin with. There is a MAXIMUM of six replays that can be called for by coaches in a game, and I doubt there has ever been a game where all six were actually used. The replay booth is reviewing every call anyway, and they'll only signal for an official review in a close situation. Replay has only made the game better, and I feel it's use should be expanded.
Football is the perfect sport for replays. VERY quick plays that last 5-30 seconds and are often decided by inches. With football you have an average of 30 seconds between plays. That's why ALL plays are reviewed. What they need to change is something they need to pick up from tennis. Don't limit the number of challenges per game, limit the number of WRONG challenges per game. If you challenge 17 times and get them all correct, that's fantastic, you have made the game more fair, you should be punished or given a disadvantage only because of an incorrect challenge, not a correction.
jordanandallison is right... I always felt if the coach was right on his challenges, why are they taken away? he was right, and if the ref keeps screwing up let the coach keep challenging, then discipline the ref after the game.
I thought that they got their challenge back if they were proven correct?
Always been torn on this - There is such a thing as a judgment call in baseball and part of the game the way I grew up was that sometimes the call goes your way and sometimes it doesn't - and that's just the way it is - sometimes your happy and sometimes you're heartbroken..
That's the point - why not get it right EVERY time to help keep the motto: "There's no crying in baseball". I want the calls made right EVERY time. It's great to be nostalgic but the reality is we have the capability so we should use it. Like the prior post - why use a car when riding a horse was how we did it for 100's of years? - It's because we 'evolve' and this needs to occur.
Baseball is the only "sport" where fans actually want to see incorrect calls. What a joke!
That's a fair point. It could definitely be argued that instant replay is not an improvement for the reasons you specified, in which case my previous comment would not apply.
However, while I agree that it's nice to go out to a stadium and enjoy a relaxing afternoon or evening with beer and garlic fries, I think that instant replay is sooner or later going to become a necessity. And the reason is because while baseball may be a relaxing time at the stadium for the majority of the time, a lot of people have a lot invested in this sport just like any other sport, whether it be hometown pride or actual money on bets, sponsorship deals, or players' salaries. You can argue that those vested interests detract from the purity and enjoyment of the game and I would agree, but they exist nonetheless, and when those types of concerns come to a head on a difficult call, instant replay is the best solution we have to ensuring an accurate call. And I would sympathize with someone who lost a lot of money on a bet or a player who lost a bonus because an umpire made a wrong call that cost that team the game.
I also agree that having instant replay on every play as another person suggested would be ridiculous, though not necessarily because it would slow down the game. Let's face it, baseball isn't exactly fast-paced anyway, but there's nothing wrong with that. However, I do believe umpires should have quick access to a replay camera if they decide they've got a borderline pitch on their hands.
Baseball umpires are by far the best officials in sports. You will see the replays on Sportcenter and the umps are rarely incorrect, especially in baserunning calls. With that in mind, it doesn't hurt to supplement their calling with an advanced system (HDTV replay). However, I can also relate to the purists and the fact that things have been so good for so long that it isn't a bad thing to keep it under complete control of the UMP.
I just want to see replay for home plate calls and foul/homers..
You're my boy blue!
Humans make mistakes. It all balances out in the end anyway. Some calls go your way and some don't. I am sure after a ref, umpire, etc. has a chance to see the play later, he or she wishes they could have that call back! I love HDTV, but the hell with all the replay crap. Every league has been just fine for years, why take the human element (mistakes) out of the game. As i said before, it all balances out in the end.
It balances in the long run. But in the short term it has the chance of deciding games, even crucial games, championship games.
Why don't they just use both an umpire and robot cameras?
When there is a discrepancy in the computer with the call, they should review it.
This only works for pitches. There are still too many calls that are wrong that can change the outcome of a game. Third Strike calls can be critical.
As far as other calls ... have an umpire behind a monitor to view close calls. And if there is a discrepancy ... review it. This can be done quickly. Too close to call goes to the umpire's original call.
Technology and baseball have never mixed well.
In my opinion there is no need for even the reviews they have now. What's done is done in a game. I see very little point in reviewing. There is no point in crying over spilled milk (or sports).
@David: You are right. Baseball UMPs are the best in sports period, but I don’t agree with you at all on the home plate calls.
I am on the fence of the replay system in baseball in general, but I do agree that there are a few areas it could be implemented in. However, one thing for sure is I would probably stop watching the professional game if it was implemented on ball and strike calls.
Being a catcher my whole life all the way through college I know the game really well and understand the pitching game through and through. It would be absolutely ridiculous to take a break for a replay every time there is close call. Even a few seconds would screw things up. Pitchers are all about rhythm, command, and getting in a grove and taking that away from them would impair the game FOREVER. The pitchers would not only lose the momentum they gain after throwing a borderline strike, but we would also lose the excitement of third strike calls. I mean we would no longer have a confident ring up by the ump, no throw down to third by the catch, no batters emotion; nothing. Instead we would wait in limbo for the stupid replay system to make the call before we could move on. Also, pitching command is something so special and impressive that it would sadden me to see the effects of that washed away because of replays. What I mean is when a pitcher "has his stuff" they definitely get the benefit of the doubt calls by the home plate ump, and the same applies to veteran pitchers who have earned respect for their many years of top caliber pitching. Basically pitching and ball and strike calls are more than a perfect science, and it would not make any sense to debate every close call. I guess in the end I am a purist for the pitching game and that is really the only thing I don’t like about the college game with the aluminum bats and so much of the young pitching talent already in the minors.
On the other hand, I think there is enough merit for replays for fair ball, tag outs and force outs at the bags, check swings, and hit-by-pitch. However, if they were to start watching the second or short stop’s foot on a double play then they would have to change the sliding rules back to how it is in college. You know the whole close enough to the bag because of how liberal base runners are allowed to slide at them.
Another problem is it would not be feasible to implement replays in college or even minor league games which would cause even more disconnect between the levels of the sport.
One caveat to the pitching thing is maybe there could be some allotment of contested calls. Like 3-5 pitches each side can have reviewed very quickly for just the most important moments or most questionable calls. This is getting tool long now, but I had to get that off my chest for those who are not thinking about the details enough.
You would think that the number 1 priority for an umpire or official is to get the call right, not to stake out turf.
I mean, why are you an umpire, fellas? Is it just about picking up a paycheck, or is it to keep the game of baseball as fair and your calls as accurate as you can? Isn't fairness and accuracy why you decided to work in baseball in the first place?
That said, in my job, if I can use a new technology to do the job better, fairer, and more accurately, I'm all for it.
My suggestion to the umpires is to grow up, re-dedicate yourselves to the game, and use the same technologies that are helping officials keep other sports fair and accurate.
My biggest problem with Instant-Replay is that there are times when it cannot be used in a situation where it should be.
Mainly, it can't be used to negate a call due to a penalty or ref/ump blowing their whistle.
I.E, Marian Hossa's goal in Anaheim with time winding down that would have tied up the game for the Red Wings.
Sportscenter will also show when they show their frame-by-frame analysis the penalties or objections in question as well.
Officials in all sports occasionally blow calls, and if that were the extent of the problem, we could live with it and forget about the high-tech second guessing. Unfortunately, baseball umpiring seems to attract too many egomaniacal I-am-the-game types who insist on imposing their will on the contests they are supposed to merely officiate. Many of the worst offenders were purged a decade ago when the umpires' union went on strike and were seamlessly replaced by college and minor league umps. But the bad old days have returned. I've seen too many umpires' pursue managers and players into the dugout to prolong arguments, and every plate official has his own definition of the strike zone. I support QuesTec and any other device that will enforce consistency and perhaps slap down some umpires' out of control egos. However, baseball moves slowly enough already without replay. I generally prefer my baseball games under 4 hours, thank you.
@TIGER
Just to clarify, I wasn't referring to strike/ball calls. I only want replay for scoring (IE Matt Holliday sliding against San Diego in 2007 to win the game.) I am a fan of the Rockies, but I'm also a fan of the right call; he was out.
I don't want to slow the game down either, but I want to see the right team win.
The NHL debated doing penalty replays but settled with scoring plays. If it's gotta be done, that's the way to do it.