Does Anyone Else Not Like the Replay Addition?

[Old#5fan]

Replay has helped us in the last two games. Today it just happened obviously and last night with the double on the first pitch of the game Farrell made his SP stand there after having warmed up for what seemed like forever before the call eventually was upheld. Lackey and Farrell looked like they were "debating" in the dugout after the top half of the inning and Lackey looked visibly annoyed. All of that helps us.

I prefer having replay to having a manager (let's say Buck in this instance) going out and arguing pointlessly for 7 or 8 minutes and then eventually getting tossed, no longer managing the game.

What I think they should do is create a time limit from the time they are connected to the office in NY, say, 2 minutes. If it's not figured out by then the ruling on the field should stand.

Also the manager coming out to ask the umpire to "take a look" which last night was basically a 2nd challenge for Boston: what umpire is going to say no? If you use your challenge on the first pitch of the game you shouldn't have the right to come out and basically challenge again. I think that's crap.

I agree mostly with you, but to me the rule should be you get another challenge if you win your first one, but not if you lose it.

[nevadaO]

I agree mostly with you, but to me the rule should be you get another challenge if you win your first one, but not if you lose it.

I believe that's how it's set up, which is why I think after Farrell lost his challenge in the 1st he shouldn't have been able to pressure the umpire to basically give him another challenge.

[tntoriole]

I am not in favor of the replay rule as I have noted in other threads on this topic. How many in favor of the rule on this post have ever umpired (high school level or above)? The art of umpiring is much more difficult than it may look at home.

[skanar]

I believe that's how it's set up, which is why I think after Farrell lost his challenge in the 1st he shouldn't have been able to pressure the umpire to basically give him another challenge.

I'd prefer to do away with the managers formally challenging at all. If there's a close call, a look at the replay should happen. Otherwise, it shouldn't. The umpires should be able to call New York and ask for a second opinion, the manager of either team should be able to go out and say, "you sure?" and New York should be able to let the umps know that something is amiss.

There just aren't THAT many close or missed calls. Streamline the replays by doing away with the manager gamesmanship, and the time it takes to wait for the manager to decide to challenge or not, and have a (very) few more of them.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I think it's fine. Gonna be some hiccups but bottom line is we're getting a lot more calls right than wrong now. I don't like these continuation no catch calls that they are making and I think they are right about catchers sneaking back over the plate to block it. Those aren't really replay issues but policy issues that they need to clarify.

[notyourbuddy]

I am not in favor of the replay rule as I have noted in other threads on this topic. How many in favor of the rule on this post have ever umpired (high school level or above)? The art of umpiring is much more difficult than it may look at home.

If it were easy then there would never be any missed calls. The fact that it is so difficult is the reason replay exists.

[CA-ORIOLE]

If it were easy then there would never be any missed calls. The fact that it is so difficult is the reason replay exists.

Right and the umpires seem to be perfectly happy with it. Takes a lot of the scrutiny off of them imo.

[jabba72]

I think a league office should handle the replays and not the umps. Would be much quicker.

[Moshagge3]

Joe Posnanski, as usual, has a really good take on this subject. I don't know if I agree with him that the umps should only be allowed to watch one replay, but there needs to be a time limit. If you don't think you have enough evidence to overturn after one minute, then that should be it. The call stands. The point of replay should be to prevent a team (or an individual like Armando Galarraga) from getting screwed over by obviously horrible calls that everybody knows are wrong within seconds. So putting a time limit makes everybody happy. Jim Joyce doesn't have to break down and weep at any more press conferences, and fans don't have to sit through a six-minute delay after the first pitch of the game (for crying out loud, Farrell).

[CA-ORIOLE]

I think a league office should handle the replays and not the umps. Would be much quicker.

The umps don't handle the replays now. An Operations Center in NY does.

[tcoriole]

I loathe instant replay, particularly in baseball. Too slow and not as easy or obvious as you would expect. The foul ball last (upheld as fair) could have been called either way. Let's keep the human element in the game.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Morgan423]

Replay is needed and welcome, just not in this form.

Get rid of the league office review. Get a fifth ump to review replays immediately following plays. He looks at each one once or twice, no more than 10 - 15 seconds, and overturns blown calls. No challenges needed, just plays that are clearly called wrong upon brief review. Easy, simple, quick.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I loathe instant replay, particularly in baseball. Too slow and not as easy or obvious as you would expect. The foul ball last (upheld as fair) could have been called either way. Let's keep the human element in the game.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ehh, it was inconclusive. Lots of bad calls are being reversed and overall it's not that time consuming. I'd say it is working out fine overall. I do miss some of the arguments though.

[Morgan423]

I loathe instant replay, particularly in baseball. Too slow and not as easy or obvious as you would expect. The foul ball last (upheld as fair) could have been called either way. Let's keep the human element in the game.

The human element should be reduced in sports officiating as much as possible. In all sports, the players should determine the outcome. Never the refs. Never the umpires.

[ledzepp8]

I don't have a problem with it but I don't really like the whole aspect of if you don't have a challenge you can still ask the umps to review a call. Okay...it's at their discretion...but that's still basically you challenging the call.