Should Baseball Have Instant Replay?

[SmileOfTheShadow]

How about this hot button topic? Do we have enough baseball watchers to make a discussion?

[Dr Maturin]

It shouldn't. Just hire umpires who are not complete morons with poor eyesight. And expand the rules on the other umps being able to overrule. But don't do instant replay.

[SmileOfTheShadow]

It shouldn't. Just hire umpires who are not complete morons with poor eyesight. And expand the rules on the other umps being able to overrule. But don't do instant replay.

Why not? Wouldn't it be best to take the human error out of the game? I just watched a play last night where a guy was called safe at first that he was out by more than a foot. Give the managers a certain number of challenges per game, and if they're wrong, their challenges are revoked. I don't see how it could hurt, only stop lousy calls.

[David Panzer]

While I no longer watch baseball, I wouldn't mind replay in MLB. It hasn't hurt any sport that it is used, even motorsports which consider themselves sports .

Baseball doesn't need another umpire ruining a perfect game because he fucked up a call at first base.

[Dr Maturin]

A challenge system? Why?

"What is the point of replay," he wondered, pointedly, "if not to get all calls correct?"If baseball transitions, as expected, to a system that uses replay umpires, and if it successfully addresses certain technological issues, it would have the capacity to fix virtually every incorrect call. But if it goes to a challenge system instead, Port sees lots of potential issues.

"I think a challenge system would lead to unbelievable confusion and would miss the point of instituting replay," he wrote. "You would be amazed how many managers, coaches, and players are not conversant with the rules."

He worries, he said, about teams "eternally" challenging calls that wouldn't be challengeable. Which would be a mess unto itself. He also worries -- with reason -- about managers running out of challenges early and having a game decided by a missed call later, after the challenge well had run dry.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/blog/_/name/s...instant-replay

Good point about challenges vs. reviews.

If they do this (IR in baseball), it needs to be like instant replay in tennis: fast, decisive, and final, especially on plays at first base (and other force outs).

I am not sure I trust the strike zone trackers on TV, though.

[Looney]

Agreed

If they do this (IR in baseball), it needs to be like instant replay in tennis: fast, decisive, and final, especially on plays at first base (and other force outs).

I am not sure I trust the strike zone trackers on TV, though.

GREAT POINT! Fast is the key. And I don't trust that strike zone tracker either. I think they will have to wait for better technology before balls & strikes could truly be tracked.

And challenge vs. review, I think it has to be a review ump in a booth. They just need to set up rules like foul balls, trapped balls, home runs, and close outs. A review ump, I don't know, rings a bell if they think the play was close enough to require a second look. Challenges just slow down the process. One person in a booth asking for a review, watches the replay from a couple different angles, then explains it or shows it to an ump. That is about all the delay the game could handle.

[Dr Maturin]

And if paying another umpire is a concern, they could conceivably have two or three on any given night, in a centralized location, calling all of the games. How many reviewable plays would there be in 15 games? There is no need to have the review umpire physically at the game.

Good thoughts.

[Looney]

True

Like the NHL has reviews from Toronto, MLB could have review central in say . . . . Cooperstown. LOL