Let the Debate Begin: Instant Replay in the MLB
Apparently we could be seeing instant replay on home run balls (and possibly select foul calls) in baseball as early as August 1st. While many baseball purists and traditionalists have vehemently attacked the notion of "technologizing" (I may have just made up a word there) the game to this degree, Major League Baseball, players, owners and fans seem to have come to the consensus that the judiciary use of the power of instant replay would ultimately benefit the game of baseball. The debate is silently raging as this issue picks up steam, so we're here to offer our insight on the topic, for what it's worth.
As to whether instant replay is a good idea and if it would work out in the game of baseball, we've already had several highly publicized games this season that were significantly affected by the lack of an instant replay system (some might go so far as to say that they were decided by umpire error). The most recognizable incident came during May's Subway Series between the Yanks and Mets. I won't rehash the entire scenario (you can read about it here), but suffice it to say the wrong call was made but it thankfully didn't impact the outcome of the game. Umpire Bob Davidson, however, admitted his fallibility, a characteristic typically not found in many of Davidson's fellow umpires.
Summing up the matter, Davidson concluded, "I [expletive] it up. I'm the one who thought it was a [expletive] foul ball. I saw it on the replay. I'm the one who [expletive] it up so you can put that in your paper. Bolts and nuts, I [expletive] up. You've just got to move on." I think you guys and gals can figure out which four letter word to use to fill in the blanks.
Moving on, it's already been decided that managers and players will not have the power to enact the use of replay; that responsibility lies with the umpires alone. As it stands right now, all replay matters would be handled at a central location at the MLB's Advanced Media headquarters in New York as opposed to at each individual ballpark. While it appears that the primary decision-making powers would belong to these "replay specialists," the on-site umpires would still have access to all video feeds.
I understand what the MLB is trying to accomplish here, but doesn't not allowing managers to initiate replay still make it just as subjective as it was prior to instant replay being used? Sure the umpires now have the ability to go under the curtain, so to speak, and watch the ball clear the yellow line or fall just short (or call someone who has the ability to do so), but you know there are bound to be incidents where an umpire (or an entire crew) decides to forgo the replay process and decides conclusively on an outcome without relying on video evidence. It's for this reason that it seems to be a wiser choice to put a fraction of the power in the manager's hands, say with one use of instant replay per game (similar to how NFL coaches get two challenges per game). The coaches won't make decisions on the call to be made, nor will they even have access to the video being viewed by the umpires and replay officials, but it seems to me that giving a bit of the power to the coaches while keeping the bulk of control in the hands of the MLB's authority figures is the only surefire way to take the subjectivity out of these botched calls.
As for the debate over when instant replay should be instituted... uhh, right away, please? I've read and heard arguments that suggest that instituting instant replay mid-season would be foolish because it's unfair to the teams that suffered because of blown calls from earlier in the season, but what about the teams that would suffer later in the season if the MLB waited until the offseason to enact instant replay? What do you say to them if a blown call causes them to lose a game, or worse, miss the playoffs?
If you're still having trouble deciding what side of the issue you're on, think of it this way: imagine watching Game 7 of the World Series and David Ortiz comes to the plate in the bottom of the ninth with one on and two out. The Sox are down two as Papi performs that signature stride, launches his arms toward the ball, and sends it flying toward the center field seats. The ball scrapes above the home run line but somehow glances the wall and falls straight back onto the field, leaving the umpiring crew scratching their heads. Wouldn't you want them to have the ability to call up the league officials and have them look at the tapes to get the call right? Me too... knew you'd see it my way.
The big argument against instant replay seems to be that technology of this nature doesn't belong in the game because it somehow tarnishes baseball's centuries-old fundamental premises. "They didn't have replay in 1845 when Cartwright wrote the first manual containing the rules of baseball, so we shouldn't have it in our game today," something along those lines. It's a somewhat compelling argument, but it's silly to think that the advancements in technology that we've enjoyed up until now shouldn't be reflected in the makeup of our professional athletics. The NFL, NBA and NHL all have various forms of instant replay and without a doubt it's made each of the respective sports more accurate and just basically better in general. Furthermore, it's borderline hypocritical to deny the game of the technology based on this archaic principal as nearly every aspect of the game from the composition of balls to the construction of ballparks to the nutrition and personal fitness of the athletes has been heavily influenced by technological advances throughout the game's history.
All I know is that umpires screw up calls in baseball far more than officials and referees do in any other sport (sure NFL refs are frequently off half a yard or more when spotting the ball, but that rarely affects the outcome of a game as significantly as getting a home run call totally wrong). If we can cut down on that and do it as quickly as possible, why not take advantage of the ability?
As to whether instant replay is a good idea and if it would work out in the game of baseball, we've already had several highly publicized games this season that were significantly affected by the lack of an instant replay system (some might go so far as to say that they were decided by umpire error). The most recognizable incident came during May's Subway Series between the Yanks and Mets. I won't rehash the entire scenario (you can read about it here), but suffice it to say the wrong call was made but it thankfully didn't impact the outcome of the game. Umpire Bob Davidson, however, admitted his fallibility, a characteristic typically not found in many of Davidson's fellow umpires.
Summing up the matter, Davidson concluded, "I [expletive] it up. I'm the one who thought it was a [expletive] foul ball. I saw it on the replay. I'm the one who [expletive] it up so you can put that in your paper. Bolts and nuts, I [expletive] up. You've just got to move on." I think you guys and gals can figure out which four letter word to use to fill in the blanks.
Moving on, it's already been decided that managers and players will not have the power to enact the use of replay; that responsibility lies with the umpires alone. As it stands right now, all replay matters would be handled at a central location at the MLB's Advanced Media headquarters in New York as opposed to at each individual ballpark. While it appears that the primary decision-making powers would belong to these "replay specialists," the on-site umpires would still have access to all video feeds.
I understand what the MLB is trying to accomplish here, but doesn't not allowing managers to initiate replay still make it just as subjective as it was prior to instant replay being used? Sure the umpires now have the ability to go under the curtain, so to speak, and watch the ball clear the yellow line or fall just short (or call someone who has the ability to do so), but you know there are bound to be incidents where an umpire (or an entire crew) decides to forgo the replay process and decides conclusively on an outcome without relying on video evidence. It's for this reason that it seems to be a wiser choice to put a fraction of the power in the manager's hands, say with one use of instant replay per game (similar to how NFL coaches get two challenges per game). The coaches won't make decisions on the call to be made, nor will they even have access to the video being viewed by the umpires and replay officials, but it seems to me that giving a bit of the power to the coaches while keeping the bulk of control in the hands of the MLB's authority figures is the only surefire way to take the subjectivity out of these botched calls.
As for the debate over when instant replay should be instituted... uhh, right away, please? I've read and heard arguments that suggest that instituting instant replay mid-season would be foolish because it's unfair to the teams that suffered because of blown calls from earlier in the season, but what about the teams that would suffer later in the season if the MLB waited until the offseason to enact instant replay? What do you say to them if a blown call causes them to lose a game, or worse, miss the playoffs?
If you're still having trouble deciding what side of the issue you're on, think of it this way: imagine watching Game 7 of the World Series and David Ortiz comes to the plate in the bottom of the ninth with one on and two out. The Sox are down two as Papi performs that signature stride, launches his arms toward the ball, and sends it flying toward the center field seats. The ball scrapes above the home run line but somehow glances the wall and falls straight back onto the field, leaving the umpiring crew scratching their heads. Wouldn't you want them to have the ability to call up the league officials and have them look at the tapes to get the call right? Me too... knew you'd see it my way.
The big argument against instant replay seems to be that technology of this nature doesn't belong in the game because it somehow tarnishes baseball's centuries-old fundamental premises. "They didn't have replay in 1845 when Cartwright wrote the first manual containing the rules of baseball, so we shouldn't have it in our game today," something along those lines. It's a somewhat compelling argument, but it's silly to think that the advancements in technology that we've enjoyed up until now shouldn't be reflected in the makeup of our professional athletics. The NFL, NBA and NHL all have various forms of instant replay and without a doubt it's made each of the respective sports more accurate and just basically better in general. Furthermore, it's borderline hypocritical to deny the game of the technology based on this archaic principal as nearly every aspect of the game from the composition of balls to the construction of ballparks to the nutrition and personal fitness of the athletes has been heavily influenced by technological advances throughout the game's history.
All I know is that umpires screw up calls in baseball far more than officials and referees do in any other sport (sure NFL refs are frequently off half a yard or more when spotting the ball, but that rarely affects the outcome of a game as significantly as getting a home run call totally wrong). If we can cut down on that and do it as quickly as possible, why not take advantage of the ability?
Comments