Instant Replay coming to baseball soon

[HollywoodLeo]

How many times are you sitting at home watching a game when a close call is made and they show the slow mo replay on TV and you instantly know right off, without a shadow of a doubt, whether or not the call was right?

I know for me it's quite a bit.

[NYgiantsfan5689]

For the record, Tim Kurkjian just made the same EXACT argument I did on SportsCenter this morning. He used the phrase "there's a human element of the game that's always been a part of it."

[rockin500]

For the record, Tim Kurkjian just made the same EXACT argument I did on SportsCenter this morning. He used the phrase "there's a human element of the game that's always been a part of it."

what about basketball and football? for a long time there were only human elements involved as well. That argument doesnt really fly.

[HollywoodLeo]

For the record, Tim Kurkjian just made the same EXACT argument I did on SportsCenter this morning. He used the phrase "there's a human element of the game that's always been a part of it."

Being stated on ESPN doesn't make the argument any less senseless.

[browntown653]

For the record, Tim Kurkjian just made the same EXACT argument I did on SportsCenter this morning. He used the phrase "there's a human element of the game that's always been a part of it."

Just curious, what's your stance on instant replay in other sports?

[NYgiantsfan5689]

I only like it in football because calls can often rest on the judgement of a referee, like pass interference for example. And because things happen so fast, sometimes they need another look to determine what they think. And the only judgement call in baseball is a ball and strike, and they should NEVER have instant replay for balls and strikes, I think we're all in agreement on that here from what I've heard. However, I think only in football should it be used. I think it prolonges basketball games and I don't like it. I think in baseball, I'm sure they could figure out a smooth way to do it, but I already said how I feel about it in baseball. I also think that instant replay should not be expanded to anything else in football. Allow the refs to make some calls as it is, like offsides, or holding.

I feel that in general, instant replay takes away the need for a referee, and that if I were a ref or ump, I would feel like my job is being infringed upon. That shouldn't happen.

[HollywoodLeo]

I only like it in football because calls can often rest on the judgement of a referee, like pass interference for example. And because things happen so fast, sometimes they need another look to determine what they think. And the only judgement call in baseball is a ball and strike, and they should NEVER have instant replay for balls and strikes, I think we're all in agreement on that here from what I've heard. However, I think only in football should it be used. I think it prolonges basketball games and I don't like it. I think in baseball, I'm sure they could figure out a smooth way to do it, but I already said how I feel about it in baseball. I also think that instant replay should not be expanded to anything else in football. Allow the refs to make some calls as it is, like offsides, or holding.

To be honest, I'd rather see you making the "it'd slow down the game too much" argument.

As much as I disagree with that argument, at least it's a viable argument against it that actually focuses on whether or not it'd be a practical application to the game.

What you're basically telling me here is that "Yeah, it makes sense, but I don't want to do it because I'd rather we do things the way they've always been done in the name of tradition".

As far as making a call on a "fast" play, it's really no different than asking a human being to make a call on a trap from a distance at real time, or a foul ball when he doesn't get to it in time.

As I stated earlier in the thread, your pointing out how a football play is more of a judgment call than a black or white issue is more of an argument for instant replay in baseball than it is against.

The fact that it's more black and white in baseball makes it that much easier to tell what the correct call is, and thus make the process much quicker than it is in football when they're taking more than the alloted one minute they're allowed to try and guesstimate what happened.

I feel that in general, instant replay takes away the need for a referee, and that if I were a ref or ump, I would feel like my job is being infringed upon. That shouldn't happen.

It doesn't take away the need for a referee or an umpire, it simply assists them in their duties.

That's like saying the gun takes away the need for the cops.

Instant Replay is a tool, not a replacement.

[NYgiantsfan5689]

As I stated earlier in the thread, your pointing out how a football play is more of a judgment call than a black or white issue is more of an argument for instant replay in baseball than it is against.

The fact that it's more black and white in baseball makes it that much easier to tell what the correct call is, and thus make the process much quicker than it is in football when they're taking more than the alloted one minute they're allowed to try and guesstimate what happened.

No, the fact that it's black and white means the ump should be able to make the call without I.R. If he can't, then 1) he shouldn't be umping or 2) he's human and makes mistakes, and there shouldn't be a machine there to correct them, IMO.

t doesn't take away the need for a referee or an umpire, it simply assists them in their duties.

That's like saying the gun takes away the need for the cops.

Instant Replay is a tool, not a replacement.

That's TOTALLY different. Humans can't tell with the naked eye how fast a car is going. And the cop still has to make the concious decision to go after the guy and then actually pull him/her over. Instant replay would tell the ump if the call was right or wrong, hands down. It does all the work for them, work that 90% of the time they could have made themselves. A radar gun doesn't do all the work for the cop, just the tip of the iceberg.


I'm not going to argue this anymore because despite the fact that you guys make good points, I'm not convinced that I.R. should be used in baseball. I just don't see the need for it. There's 4 umps out there. If it's a close situation, they should be watching extra careful. If a call changes the course of an important game, they get fired. And it happens. It's all part of the game. Nothing is going to change my opinion on that. Maybe I'm being stubborn and stupid, but it's how I feel, and I'm sticking by that.

[HollywoodLeo]

No, the fact that it's black and white means the ump should be able to make the call without I.R. If he can't, then 1) he shouldn't be umping or 2) he's human and makes mistakes, and there shouldn't be a machine there to correct them, IMO.

1) He's human, there's nothing wrong with instituting a system to fix human error.

Furthermore, it's "black and white" but it's not so plain when you're standing far away from the play and possibly have a bad angle, and are watching it in real time.

When I say it's "black and white" i'm referring to going back and looking at it in slow motion, with all the extra angles.

2) See above, I'd rather have a "machine" to make the calls fair.
Nobody's going to lose their job here, so what's the issue?
Nobody's asking us to replace the umps all together, just asking to give them an extra tool to help them in their job.

That's TOTALLY different. Humans can't tell with the naked eye how fast a car is going. And the cop still has to make the concious decision to go after the guy and then actually pull him/her over. Instant replay would tell the ump if the call was right or wrong, hands down. It does all the work for them, work that 90% of the time they could have made themselves. A radar gun doesn't do all the work for the cop, just the tip of the iceberg.

The analogy completely went over your head.

I was simply annotating that IR is just a tool that would be for use by the umpires, much like a radar gun (or hand gun, which I was referring to) is for a cop, and not the replacement for the ump that you're making it out to be.

Nobody's losing their job if IR is in place, they simply have another tool available to them.

I'm not going to argue this anymore because despite the fact that you guys make good points, I'm not convinced that I.R. should be used in baseball. I just don't see the need for it. There's 4 umps out there. If it's a close situation, they should be watching extra careful. If a call changes the course of an important game, they get fired. And it happens. It's all part of the game. Nothing is going to change my opinion on that. Maybe I'm being stubborn and stupid, but it's how I feel, and I'm sticking by that.

You said you were going to quit arguing it a long time ago

You have yet to provide me with one argument against it that makes any sense, though.

But at least you openly admit that you're just being stubborn.

[NYgiantsfan5689]

You said you were going to quit arguing it a long time ago

You have yet to provide me with one argument against it that makes any sense, though.

But at least you openly admit that you're just being stubborn.

Haha I know. Well it makes sense in my head, I guess I just haven't been doing a very good job explaining it. O well. I do admit that though lol

[HollywoodLeo]

Looking back at an old thread from another forum on the subject that was recently bumped due to this news I remembered something I suggested in response to the "It'd slow the game down more" argument.

They could have someone constantly reviewing every play on a monitor. His sole job is to watch the game and replay (for his personal viewing) close plays "just in case"

Then, when someone wants to challenge it's as simple as "Hey, Joe, was he safe?" "yes he was" "thanks".

[love_that_reefer]

As long as its juts on homerun calls, I am all for it. Safe/out, balls/strikes, fair/foul is not needed in this game and would be extremely difficult to deal with. Homeruns only!!

[HollywoodLeo]

Other than balls/strikes I disagree that it'd be too difficult to deal with.

There's 4 viable stances on this.

No replay at all, just home run calls, everything but balls/strikes, and everything.

I can't see anyone agreeing with the latter as replaying balls and strikes would be way too tedious and insane.

I kinda fall into the third category.

[love_that_reefer]

Safe and out would interfere with the game too much as would fair and foul. That would be inviting a horrible mess. Not one person has come up with a viable solution so homerun calls only.

[HollywoodLeo]

That's really the only argument I have ever seen against IR that makes some sense.

At least you're not telling me we should keep it as is because of the lame cop-out that's "tradition".

That being said, I have made a viable solution to it, even if you don't agree with it.

Treat it like a ground rule double, or limit it to reversing it to a foul ball or an out, but not the other way around, because it's only an issue if you're trying to reverse an out or a foul to a fair ball and you don't really know how far the base runners would have advanced.

All that aside, however, I wouldn't have a problem with it being limited to just HR calls.