Expanded replay

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from michaelsjr. Show michaelsjr's posts

    Expanded replay

    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.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from michaelsjr. Show michaelsjr's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    Your opinion is respected.  I just disagree.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    In response to michaelsjr's comment:

    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.

     



    while I admire your passion

    we both knew this was coming once they started looking at the HR's

    I was against it but

    the more time passes the more I like the idea

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    In response to michaelsjr's comment:

    Your opinion is respected.  I just disagree.




    fair enough. I'm just of the mindset that if we have the means to be accurate and don't employ them. we're being hishonest to the players, fans and the game.

    i've seen many plays where a guy is dead to rights on the basepath and is called out despite getting under/around the tag. Balls are ruled foul when they hit the line (a pitcher kept his no-no intact by one of those calls last season). bang bang plays that are impossible for an umpire to accurately call without guessing. They do their job as best as they can but there are a handful of play types that umpires have a tough time being accurate with. They should have the option to double check their call and ensure the game is fair. that is their job after all.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

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

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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. 

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    I have no issue with certain calls, but not every call. That way things like HR's and maybe foul/fair are called right. There will be plenty that isnt reviewable.

    I also think if they employ another umpire upstairs to review the questioned calls so the ones on the field dont have to leave, that will surely speed things up as well. The way they do it now is unbelievably dumb.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    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.

     

    Another  B I N G O   !!!


     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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??

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    In response to Alibiike's comment:

    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.

     




    so have the umps always call the runner safe on a close play, balls fair on a questionable drop near the line, a trap on a potential catch. Always ensuring the runners are advancing. then if the play turns out to be the opposite they can be moved back. It's like the old addage "it's better to measure long than short. you can always cut a bit more off, you can't uncut".

    otherwise they would have to come up with a rule giving runners free base(s) for say, if a call that hit's the line is ruled foul only to find out it was actually fair. the play was called dead before the runner(s) established how far they could get if it was a fair ball so the umps would have to make up for it.. maybe make it a ground rule double type of thing? But i like the former idea better. In that situation, if the ump could think it might go either way, call it fair, keeping the ball live and thus the play going. Then review it after the fact and if the ball was fair, no harm done. the runners (and any outs made on the runners) are intact. If the ball was foul, everyone goes back. easy.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    Though I consider myself a purist (I hate the extra wildcard), I'm OK with expanded replay ... to a point.

    Like  football, I'd allow the manager a certain number of challenges.  Two seems right to me. Unlike football,  replay crew will  have to make a decision within 30 seconds. The  NFL usually takes two full minutes, even on clear-cut cases, during  which time the network (surprise, surprise) goes to a commercial break.

    Oh, and balls and strikes cannot be challenged under any circumstances.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    the extent of replay will cover plays at the plate, fair/foul calls and trap catches. not strikes or balls.

    i don't think managers should get challenges though. all plays should be under constant review and corrected when necessary.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    I could live with that.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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.

     

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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.

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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 ;)

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    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

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from joel49. Show joel49's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    In response to carnie's comment:

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




    I like it.  Some plays will be reviewed in less time than it takes for a manager to run onto the field to argue the call.  Technology should prevail over human error IMO.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    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 feel better about my position already! :D

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Expanded replay

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:

    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



    Yes, because baseball is just as serious as an execution....

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share