Instant reply to be implemented this week

Rosenthal: Yanks could be in same position next year
Game 131: We do not support teams that use child labor

ESPN has the story. Here’s how it works:

For now, video will be used only on so-called “boundary calls,” such as determining whether fly balls went over the fence or whether potential home runs were fair or foul.

Video will be collected at the office of Major League Baseball Advanced Media in New York. If the crew chief at a game decides replay needs to be checked, umpires will leave the field, technicians at MLBAM will show umpires the video and the crew chief will make the call.

Personally, I am a fan of bringing instant replay into the game. While critics believe it will slow down the game and destroy the supposed integrity of the game — the same integrity that allowed for segregation, spitballers and steroids — anything that helps umpires get the calls right should be embraced. If the whole nation can see, via instant replay, that a ball left the yard but because the umpires, out of position, couldn’t make a call, why should the game suffer?

What I don’t understand, however, is the need to implement instant replay in a haphazard fashion with 30 games left in the season. Basically, the 2008 season will be played under two sets of rules. We’ll have non-instant replay games from the season’s first five months followed by one month of instant replay. That doesn’t seem like a very logical decision to me.

I think it would have made more sense to bring instant replay online via next spring’s World Baseball Classic and a widespread implementation on Opening Day. But it is what it is, and this move should be applauded.

Rosenthal: Yanks could be in same position next year
Game 131: We do not support teams that use child labor
  • Mike A.

    Yay, can’t wait for the games to get even longer…

    • Ben K.

      I know. Those two-hour and 22-minute games the Yanks were playing last week were marathons. ;)

      • Mike A.

        Hah, you know those were an aberration.

        Think about it, first the managers have to come out and argue, then the ump has to go look at the replay, make the call, then the manager’s who’s team is negativity affected by the outcome will argue some more.

        Anyone who thinks this is going to be be a simple “that was a tough call, let’s check the replay, oh sorry Mr. Manager, we’re taking a homer away from your team, let’s play ball!” 30-second thing is fooling themselves.

        • Jamal G.

          I don’t put much stock in this argument because how long did the arguments from both Joe Girardi and Willie Randolph last on that Carlos Delgado play?

          Also, that argument is so minute in the grand scheme of things when you are weighing the benefits of getting the call right.

          • Mike A.

            Oh trust me, the benefit is good. I just don’t feel like waiting around any longer than I have too. ;)

            • Jamal G.

              Heh, I’m having a weird day. First I thought you were being sarcastic, then I thought you were being sincere, and now I think your back to sarcasm again.

        • tommiesmithjohncarlos

          Mike, come on, you’re smarter than that. All of those things (the ump discussion, the first manager’s discussion, the second manager’s discussion) are ALL going to happen whether there’s replay or not. It’s not like they haven’t been arguing about that shit so far.

          We’re talking about turning a controversial HR call from a 8 minute break in the action into a 9 minute break in the action. Whoop-de-doo.

          There’s no good reason not to do this.

  • blah

    I agree with you. It seems totally half-assed to change the rules right in the middle of the season. And it’s not simply a matter of changing the rules – this is a significant procedurcal and technological change that may experience glitches. Why not give it a dry run during spring training to work out the glitches?

  • Jamal G.

    You could say it’s a haphazard move, but then I could counter and say it’s a move that benefits the final games of the season. Why should games from August 28th on suffer from non-replay ability just to maintain the “fairness” of the 2008 season. Isn’t it better to have the final games called to the best of the umpire’s ability? Is not giving the umpires the choice of viewing replay greater increase their ability to call the game?

    Sure, you can call it unfair that games played prior to August 27th did not have the same set of rules that games played from August 28th and henceforth will have, but I think the benefit of said games August 28th and after having the replay instituted is of greater benefit than the two sets of games being played under two rules is unfair.

  • Pingback: River Ave. Blues | Game 131: We do not support teams that use child labor

  • Lou

    I disagree with you here. Don’t know why you think it is haphazard, and why would you continue to play games w/o putting your best product on the field? I don’t understand the reasoning to wait until next spring. What will have changed by then?