http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/21525757/torre-mlb-examining-expanded-replay-for-2014

Disappointed in Torre.  This is a total sellout and a blow for baseball purists.  With every replay addition they chip away at the heart of the game.

Your opinion is respected.  I just disagree.

I hate replay. It really interrupts the flow of the game.

In response to carnie's comment:

I hate replay. It really interrupts the flow of the game.

I agree completely...and this is especially true in baseball. Expanding replay is going to add to already long..relatively slow paced game. I understand people's desire to "get it right" 100% of the time...but in my opinion it takes away from the game. The officials do a good job..so what if they are not perfect? It's all part of the game.

In response to mef429's comment:

so making the wrong call is the heart of the game?? i think making the right call should trump everything else... especially if it can be implimented without being too time consuming which is likely to happen.

players are no longer going to get freebies. I'm all for it.

Do you realize how many plays during a game, are potentially subject to review? Just the number of bang-bang plays at first are enough to lengthen a game substantially if enacted.
This is the progressive mindset.

A better option is for the umpires to swallow a little pride and ask for help on close plays or allow the managers more leeway on appealing to another umpire. That way, you keep the human element in the game. We are already subjected enough to the machines. 

In response to Alibiike's comment:

In response to mef429's comment:

so making the wrong call is the heart of the game?? i think making the right call should trump everything else... especially if it can be implimented without being too time consuming which is likely to happen.

players are no longer going to get freebies. I'm all for it.

Do you realize how many plays during a game, are potentially subject to review? Just the number of bang-bang plays at first are enough to lengthen a game substantially if enacted.
This is the progressive mindset.

A better option is for the umpires to swallow a little pride and ask for help on close plays or allow the managers more leeway on appealing to another umpire. That way, you keep the human element in the game. We are already subjected enough to the machines. 

and how quickly can you figure out the right call at home? 5-10 seconds? there is a longer delay in between pitches... if we can figure it out that fast at home then an ump in a booth can figure it out just as fast and let the umps on the field know... Besides, how much time is wasted by players/managers arguing with the umps?

this can easily be implimented in a way that it will not be time consuming. If it is going to take 3 minutes a play and 20 plays are going to be reviewed then i am with you guys. but that is not the case. if i can think of a setup that isn't time consuming then the guys on MLB payroll who make big bucks for doing this sort of thing can come up with it too.

use a walkie talkie or blu-tooth or even a push to talk cellphone and chirp each other!.

"hey guy, can you check that last play for me? over."

"i'm two steps ahead of you. The runner was out. over."

done. but that would disrupt the "flow" of the game moreso than a manager throwing a fit for 5 minutes??

In response to mef429's comment:

In response to Alibiike's comment:

In response to mef429's comment:

so making the wrong call is the heart of the game?? i think making the right call should trump everything else... especially if it can be implimented without being too time consuming which is likely to happen.

players are no longer going to get freebies. I'm all for it.

Do you realize how many plays during a game, are potentially subject to review? Just the number of bang-bang plays at first are enough to lengthen a game substantially if enacted.
This is the progressive mindset.

A better option is for the umpires to swallow a little pride and ask for help on close plays or allow the managers more leeway on appealing to another umpire. That way, you keep the human element in the game. We are already subjected enough to the machines. 

and how quickly can you figure out the right call at home? 5-10 seconds? there is a longer delay in between pitches... if we can figure it out that fast at home then an ump in a booth can figure it out just as fast and let the umps on the field know... Besides, how much time is wasted by players/managers arguing with the umps?

this can easily be implimented in a way that it will not be time consuming. If it is going to take 3 minutes a play and 20 plays are going to be reviewed then i am with you guys. but that is not the case. if i can think of a setup that isn't time consuming then the guys on MLB payroll who make big bucks for doing this sort of thing can come up with it too.

use a walkie talkie or blu-tooth or even a push to talk cellphone and chirp each other!.

"hey guy, can you check that last play for me? over."

"i'm two steps ahead of you. The runner was out. over."

done. but that would disrupt the "flow" of the game moreso than a manager throwing a fit for 5 minutes??

I hear what you are saying, but you also introduce the positioning of runners since it's always a live ball and a review cannot be done until the ball becomes dead in most cases.

I hate replay. It really interrupts the flow of the game.

In response to carnie's comment:

I hate replay. It really interrupts the flow of the game.

I agree.  I get as upset as anybody when a bad call goes against our beloved Red Sox. However, I am against any use of instant replay.

One of the reasons is the seemingly arbitrary nature of how they determine what is an important enough play to be reviewed versus what is not. What makes a missed HR call any more important than a missed ball/strike call? A missed ball/strike call can impact the outcome of the game as much as a missed HR call. Why should HRs be reviewed but not balls/strikes?  And I certainly hope we never see the day when balls/strikes are reviewable. 

Besides that, selling things like a trapped ball to the umps is part of the game. As is a catcher framing a pitch to sell a strike. As is having a manager tossed for arguing a bad call. As is human error.  While I'm at it, they should not have done away with the "fake to third, throw to first" move. 

The solution, IMO, is not to resort to replay, but to hold the umpires more accountable. If an umpire is continually missing calls, he gets the boot.  Seems like a simple enough solution.

In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

In response to carnie's comment:

I hate replay. It really interrupts the flow of the game.

I agree.  I get as upset as anybody when a bad call goes against our beloved Red Sox. However, I am against any use of instant replay.

One of the reasons is the seemingly arbitrary nature of how they determine what is an important enough play to be reviewed versus what is not. What makes a missed HR call any more important than a missed ball/strike call? A missed ball/strike call can impact the outcome of the game as much as a missed HR call. Why should HRs be reviewed but not balls/strikes?  And I certainly hope we never see the day when balls/strikes are reviewable. 

Besides that, selling things like a trapped ball to the umps is part of the game. As is a catcher framing a pitch to sell a strike. As is having a manager tossed for arguing a bad call. As is human error.  While I'm at it, they should not have done away with the "fake to third, throw to first" move. 

The solution, IMO, is not to resort to replay, but to hold the umpires more accountable. If an umpire is continually missing calls, he gets the boot.  Seems like a simple enough solution.

I don't want to see replay expanded.

But, I don't have a problem with HR/Foul calss being reviewed.

I don't think those are arbitrary, because it's often impossible for an ump to get a good view of the ball, in those situations.

Balls/Strikes and base running plays are called wrong because the umps are often in the wrong spot, or just plain miss the call.

Umps also seem too enamored with the idea of having their own K zone.

I agree that umps should be held more accountable for the calls they make.

Perhaps, just making subsequent punishment public, instead of keeping it from fans, as they currently do, would shame some of the more arrogant umps into cleaning up their acts.

I hate replay. It really interrupts the flow of the game.

In response to ThefourBs' comment:

In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

In response to carnie's comment:

I hate replay. It really interrupts the flow of the game.

I agree.  I get as upset as anybody when a bad call goes against our beloved Red Sox. However, I am against any use of instant replay.

One of the reasons is the seemingly arbitrary nature of how they determine what is an important enough play to be reviewed versus what is not. What makes a missed HR call any more important than a missed ball/strike call? A missed ball/strike call can impact the outcome of the game as much as a missed HR call. Why should HRs be reviewed but not balls/strikes?  And I certainly hope we never see the day when balls/strikes are reviewable. 

Besides that, selling things like a trapped ball to the umps is part of the game. As is a catcher framing a pitch to sell a strike. As is having a manager tossed for arguing a bad call. As is human error.  While I'm at it, they should not have done away with the "fake to third, throw to first" move. 

The solution, IMO, is not to resort to replay, but to hold the umpires more accountable. If an umpire is continually missing calls, he gets the boot.  Seems like a simple enough solution.

I don't want to see replay expanded.

But, I don't have a problem with HR/Foul calss being reviewed.

I don't think those are arbitrary, because it's often impossible for an ump to get a good view of the ball, in those situations.

Balls/Strikes and base running plays are called wrong because the umps are often in the wrong spot, or just plain miss the call.

Umps also seem too enamored with the idea of having their own K zone.

I agree that umps should be held more accountable for the calls they make.

Perhaps, just making subsequent punishment public, instead of keeping it from fans, as they currently do, would shame some of the more arrogant umps into cleaning up their acts.

Joe West and Angel Hernandez dont agree with you ;)

I'm sure all the purists would be against the DNA testing that has freed more than a few innocent Death Row inmates.  Why get it right