draino sports

Based on several botched home run calls in the past few weeks, the baseball world has been toying with the idea of using instant replay. Amazingly, there are actually people out there who seem to think this is NOT a good idea. Instant replay is used to determine if a wide receiver got both feet in bounds for a touchdown, and no one has any problems with that. Is a potential lead changing home run that sneaks inside the foul pole any less important than a touchdown? Referees review shots at the end of quarters all the time in the NBA - it is quick and efficient and essentially always gets the call right - do fans piss and moan during that slight delay of the game? Not from what I can tell. Is a three pointer at the buzzer worth taking a look at, but not a ball that bounces on or just above that yellow line in the outfield? The naysayers all seem to come back to a few of the same shaky and unfounded points to state their case. The following are some of my favorites, followed by why they are complete garbage:

1. Instant replay will slow the game down.

Let’s be honest, baseball is not the fastest pace sport by a long shot. In fact, next to golf, its probably one of the slowest. Part of the beauty of the game of baseball, is being able to sit back, relax and enjoy the slower pace of the game - they call them the lazy days of summer for a reason. If once or twice a game, at most, fans and players had to wait an extra two to three minutes for a booth review of a borderline home run call, the game will not be considerably slowed down. Furthermore, two to three minutes a game for replay review is probably a gross over estimate. The frequency of plays that need to be reviewed is probably more in the range of one or two plays a week throughout the whole league. Is it really worth it to have the outcome of a game drastically changed by a botched call, just so everyone can get out of the stadium 3 minutes earlier? No one is saying there should be a review of every ball and strike, slowing the game down to a crawl. But do you think Carlos Delgado and the Mets would have minded waiting for two minutes for the instant replay to prove that his long foul ball down the left field line at Yankee Stadium actually did hit the foul pole and should have been ruled a three run home run? I doubt it.

2. Use a six man umpire crew in all games instead of instant replay (playoff format).

Baseball is a game of inches. A ball hit an inch above or below the yellow line can be the difference between a walk off home run, and a harmless two out double that can be erased with a ground out to second base by the next batter. I think it’s safe to say that if there were fifty umpires lining the walls of the outfield, there would STILL be balls that are just so close to the line, in plays happening so fast, that it’s unreasonable to expect anyone to be able to tell with certainty what the correct call is. The one way to ensure the call is made correctly is to go to the replay. To the fans who suggest a 6 man crew will solve the instant replay problem, I say why 6? Why not 5? The four on the field and one in the booth reviewing the play.

3. Baseball has been played for over a hundred years without instant replay - why use it now?

Of all the arguments against instant replay this is by far the dumbest. People made it to work everyday before the invention of cars too, but I don’t really feel like having a sore ass from riding a horse to my job everyday (although the money saved on hay over gasoline makes it worth considering). Would baseball be offending the honor of Honus Wagner by using instant replay? I’m sure he would roll over in his grave. Technology did not allow for anything like this up until the past decade or so. If baseball had the advantage of instant replay in the early days, they almost certainly would have used it.

 4. If instant replay is used for home runs, it should be used for close plays, balls and strikes, etc.

A borderline called strike three is part of the game. A bang-bang play at first base is not always going to go your team’s way. The reason why I am ok with these calls being made without replay is because the umpires are only a few feet away from the play, and are positioned perfectly to make the call. When a ball is crushed to deep center, there is no way any umpire can get within even a hundred feet of where it will land - how anyone can be expected to make a correct ruling on a ball that far away from them is crazy. When a borderline strike three is called, that is a matter of inches. When A-Rod hits a ball that bounces off the staircase in the right field bleachers of Yankee Stadium and ricochets back onto the field, that’s not a difference of inches, that’s a difference of about eight to ten feet. The only reason why that call is missed is because no umpire is anywhere near the play to make the correct call. The replay of that particular home run was so obvious, I think it would have taken about thirty seconds for the correct call to be made - instead it was ruled a ground rule double.

There are plenty of other stances people have taken against instant replay, but to continue to list and refute them would be beating a dead horse. The bottom line is, baseball is played for the fans, and fans deserve to have the game called correctly. Nothing hurts more than seeing your team lose on a play that was incorrectly called. Waiting for a replay to be reviewed for two minutes is not going to ruin baseball like many of the so-called purists would like people to believe. After all, isn’t the most important thing getting the call right?

“Anything to get the calls right.” - Chipper Jones
Those in favor: Joe Girardi, Willie Randolph, Brian Cashman, Bruce Bochy, Chipper Jones, Carl Crawford

Those opposed: John Kruk, Billy Wagner, Bud Selig, Lou Piniella

Trackback URI | Comments RSS