Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Archives | Alerts | Electronic edition | Subscribe to the paper
Subscribe to RSS   Add to My Yahoo!

November 8, 2007 5:24 AM

Baseball's Instant Replay

drew1108.gif



Discussion

  • November 8, 2007

    8:55 AM

    Brett writes:

    I like the idea of instant replays for HRs.
    Strike zones,missed calles at the plate or any other plays in the field ? Add another umpire.
    What slows baseball down are the endless visits by catchers to the mound to get signals straight or as a stall tactic to give incoming relievers more time to warm up in the pen.
    The japanese pitchers take forever to throw a pitch and batters constantly stepping out.
    I did see though quite a few times in 2007 where umps didnot allow batters to call time out and called strikes
    on pitched blls to the plate because the hitter was not in the box quick enough.

  • November 8, 2007

    8:58 AM

    John in Northglenn writes:

    Instant Replay for called strikes and plays at bases? As if baseball isn't slow enough.

  • November 8, 2007

    10:13 AM

    Ted in Vegas writes:

    Its obvious that the ball/strike calls in MLB are horrible; its too tied to visual perceptions of a single person - the ump. I would even mind an ump with an expanded or shrunken strike zone, as long as it remained consistent throughout a single game. But that never happens. We've all seen balls called strikes and strikes called balls; how is a batter supposed to know when to swing and when not when the ump can't decide where the strike zone is and where it isn't.

    Why not sensors in the ball, on the batter and around the strike zone to determine if the ball made it through the strike zone or not. At least then it would be consistent.

  • November 8, 2007

    11:26 AM

    Mark writes:

    I personlly don't think instant replay and baseball mix.

    You can't do it in one area, and not do it in another area like Drew points out, but to open it all up to all areas of the game will kill baseball.

    Just forget it. They missed the Atkins HR, and missed Holliday's play at the plate, and it all worked out like it always does.

  • November 8, 2007

    1:54 PM

    Anonymous writes:

    If replay had been in effect for the San Diego/Colorado playoff game, then replay would have upheld the fact that the Atkins ball was not a home run, and Matt Holliday would have been correctly called out at the plate as he never made contact with the plate.
    The game might well still be going on as I write this. We might be in the 783rd inning.
    The question is this - With all the money baseball pulls in, why not have umpires positioned at various points along the wall (in the stands) to verify if a ball is actually out or not? Or even better - how about baseball actually really coming down on umpires who make stupid decisions like the ump did when he called Holliday safe at home? That umpire should have been banned for life for making that call. He's already been quoted that he "had to make a snap judgement" but that he really couldn't tell if Holliday's hand had contacted the plate. He said that he was probably a little caught up in the moment, and therefore made the safe call.

  • November 8, 2007

    3:47 PM

    MJ writes:

    Actually ball was a homerun and replay would have proved it. But I don't think replay has a spot in baseball.

  • November 8, 2007

    4:21 PM

    PhillyFanatic writes:

    fortunately replay was not needed to confirm that atkins' ball was not over the fence. the umps got it right.

  • November 8, 2007

    6:19 PM

    Andy writes:

    Umpires and their mistakes are part of the game of baseball. Provisions were made for an umpire in the New York Knickerbockers formal code of playing rules in 1845. 1846 brought the first record of an argument between a player and an umpire (the umpire won). We're talking 146 years of history here. The game is fine without replay.

    As far as the Atkins non-homer, the rule is simple. To be a home run the ball has to leave the park. I don't care where it hit on the fence, it hit the fence and bounced back into play. It wasn't a home run.

  • November 8, 2007

    6:40 PM

    Andy writes:

    Ahem... 160 years of history.

  • November 8, 2007

    11:35 PM

    rwsux writes:

    Wow, a mascot saying the umps got it right on Atkins homerun.

  • November 9, 2007

    7:52 AM

    Jeremy writes:

    Andy,
    Get your facts straight. Each ballpark has its own rules for homeruns, and not all are as simple as "the ball must leave the park". One rule that appears in many venues is this: 'If a park has a yellow line running along the top of the fence, as Coors Field does, the ball must clear the yellow line. If the ball hits any part of the yellow strip and goes over the fence, it is ruled a home run." That is, a ball can hit above the yellow line, hit a flower pot, hit a Philadelphia fan, or any of the other anomalies Rockies hits have done this year, come back on the field, and be a legal homerun. Admittedly, this only adds to the confusion, but unless all ballparks are made uniform, then there will always be different rules for ballparks. Your dispute of Atkins' homerun/non-homerun only shows that you are unfamiliar with the rules for homeruns at Coors Field.

  • November 9, 2007

    9:56 AM

    PhillyFanatic writes:

    rwsux -
    I never said it was a homerun. I said the umps got the call right by NOT calling it a homerun since the ball never left the field of play. Read the posts before you assume.

    And I'm the most popular mascot in MLB. Who's this ugly purple dinosaur you guys have? Barney is it?

  • November 9, 2007

    10:22 AM

    Andy writes:

    Jeremy,

    Yes, I understand the concept of ground rules, and yes, I did know that rules like the ones you cite are in play now.

    You miss my point, though. My argument is that the ground rules ought to be changed to reflect the spirit of the rules. When a ball is hit out of play in fair territory, there's no way to determine whether the fielder would have been able to retrieve the ball before the runner had rounded the bases if the fence were not there. So, we allow the batter to score a run. We guess, though, that if the ball bounces before leaving the playing field, it's likely that the batter wouldn't be able to get past second if the fielder were able to run down the ball (so we award a ground rule double).

    I'm in favor of making the rules as simple as possible. Let's make all parts of the fence part of the playing field and design ballparks so that there are no flat topped fences (if possible). Or perhaps we can put a net or some other device that deadens the bounce of the ball on top of the fence. It works for the foul poles.

  • November 9, 2007

    2:01 PM

    bill writes:

    Who cares?

  • November 9, 2007

    2:02 PM

    Matthew writes:

    Hey, Just a thought -

    Does anyone think it's possible for the Nuggets to keep Nene in some kind of protective vault? The guy gets injured ALL THE TIME!!

    This entire roster is made of glass.

  • November 9, 2007

    2:39 PM

    Bill writes:

    Off topic to this toon, but I wonder how much Pat Bowlen enjoyed writing a $3Million check to Simeon Rice so that he could tackle 11 people over six games worth of work?

    Simeon got paid $272,727.27 each time he grabbed a human being and stopped that human being from running away.

    This sure is a funny world.

  • November 9, 2007

    3:15 PM

    Ted in Vegas writes:

    Does anybody even know what a Philly fanatic looks like?

    "most popular mascot in MLB" my foot.

  • November 9, 2007

    4:02 PM

    PhillyFanatic writes:

    I certainly don't look like Barney the Dinosaur like Dinger does. Shows that some franchises know how to do mascots (Philly), and some have no clue whatsoever (Colorado).

  • November 10, 2007

    12:26 AM

    Kim writes:

    9 times this season there were occasions where Rock ies hit HR's (confirmed by the replays), but were called doubles only.

    This is a joke.

    A lot like the Golden Glove Awards.

  • November 11, 2007

    10:46 PM

    George writes:

    Kim -

    If you've done your research as you claim to have done, please enlighten all of us to which 9 games you're talking about.

    I don't remember a single instance of what you're stating.

    And Tulowitski did not deserve a gold glove. Get that straight. Jimmy Rollins is 10 times the shortstop Tulowitski is.

  • October 11, 2010

    6:14 AM

    Gustavo Holcomb writes:

    Calories and Weight

Join the discussion

Required
Required (Will not be published or sold)

Videos

More Videos »

Please download the latest version of Adobe Flash Player, or enable JavaScript for your browser to view the video player.

About this blog

Search this blog

Recent posts

Posts by topic