U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Baseball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-07-2014, 07:17 AM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
40,950 posts, read 18,569,815 times
Reputation: 18673

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parti Rhinocéros View Post
I'm glad you didn't go to some off-the-wall, extreme example or anything.

In a bang-bang situation, part of the predictable beauty of baseball is that we all know, for the most part, what the call is going to be, and in most cases, we're content with that outcome.

Let's go with more realistic examples:

A batter smacks a double off the wall in right field. Vladdy Guerrero bare-hands it on one hop as the runner hits the bag at second and rounds for third. From nearly the warning track, Vlad rears back and fires a rope which ends up in the glove of the third basemen who swipes at the runner sliding into third. Bang bang. In live television, it's impossible to say for sure if he was safe or if he's out. The call? He's out. And you never minded before. You don't even realize that you're in the same boat as me and are okay with the occasional philosophical, romantic, or emotional call on bang-bang plays, but you are.

What's worse is that those calls are still being made on the field - because that's baseball - but now when each one is under scrutiny, the umpires judging the play from time zones away do not have the fortitude, let's say, to overturn a call made by someone of their ilk.

You're most concerned about fans at home knowing a call was blown in live time without replay. What's worse is a broken system in which fans at home know a call was blown finally by people watching the exact same replay they did and still turning in a wrong conclusion. That's far worse and we'll never get those 3-7 minutes of our lives back.
A) Despite your assumption, no, I do not think that calls should be based on some general aesthetic sense of how cool the play looked. Someone makes a great sprint and tries a shoestring catch, if the ball was fielded on one hop, no, we don't call the batter out because it was such a great effort, we call him out if to all appearances the catch was made.

B) Your final argument is the weakest that you present. It suggests that unless an improvement is perfect, we should not try to improve things. Okay, so even with replay it is possible to have a false call, but why would that be grounds for reverting back to the system where there were more false calls?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-07-2014, 11:18 AM
 
Location: San José, CA
3,265 posts, read 5,785,339 times
Reputation: 3201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
A) Despite your assumption, no, I do not think that calls should be based on some general aesthetic sense of how cool the play looked. Someone makes a great sprint and tries a shoestring catch, if the ball was fielded on one hop, no, we don't call the batter out because it was such a great effort, we call him out if to all appearances the catch was made.

B) Your final argument is the weakest that you present. It suggests that unless an improvement is perfect, we should not try to improve things. Okay, so even with replay it is possible to have a false call, but why would that be grounds for reverting back to the system where there were more false calls?
A) Another rather extreme example. I'd fall back on mine for a more realistic application. In bang-bang situations, the favored call has always, in the history of our sport, been the dynamic one. And if it wasn't, there are many moments that we would have lost that you're currently taking for granted.

There's a moment in time that did indeed result in a loss of a piece of history, and interestingly, it potentially strengthens both of our arguments.

Jim Joyce blows Armando Gallaraga's perfect game. As we both know, when home plate umpires are nearing a no-hitter or a perfect game, the strike zone increases as the game goes on. It's the human emotional element at work. In Joyce's situation, he went the opposite way. In such a situation, it would have been likely that in a close play of that magnitude, Gallaraga should have been awarded the out, and thus, the perfect game. And what happened when he wasn't? Fans of all teams - even many Indians' fans who were witnessing a perfect game against their own lineup - were angry. They were robbed of witnessing none other than a perfect game. Emotionally, philosophically, logically, we are used to the outcome reached being the one that is dynamic and/or has historical significance and when we were robbed of that moment, we didn't appreciate it.

By the same token, and in being fair to your argument as well, instant replay could have potentially overturned the call (then again, based on replay's opening week, it also might not have because it relies on a certain fraternal order of umpires to agree to say that their friend was mistaken, which appears to have an effect on whether calls are being overturned or not). Imagine a scenario where the Perfect Game you witnessed needed a lengthy overturned call to determine what you knew you saw on the field. I wouldn't pass up being at the game, but what an anticlimactic way in which to celebrate it. Now imagine if everyone at home and everyone at the stadium is seeing an obvious out and are expecting replay to make the correct call, and it again fails. Then what? Because if you're not paying attention, that's what is occurring at times thus far.

B) Nay. Unfortunately, my thesis is that we have not improved anything at all; instead, we have added a bad ingredient to a bad dish. At present, I'm declaring that the current replay system is hindering the game, not improving it. The idea that it's not "perfect" isn't even part of the equation because from what I've seen so far, it's a detriment.

Another thing I'd like to say that may or may not have been said so far is that there is at present time no communication between the umpires, the home office, and the Public Address announcer at ballparks to communicate to the fans the situation that is occurring.

The NFL had a situation in Cleveland about 12 years ago where the Browns, at home, had a potential playoff game lost because of a set of decisions surrounding replay that didn't make logical sense to the fans. The referee crew were reviewing a play they were not within the rules to review and ended up overturning a call that they were not within their limits to review. It resulted in a Cleveland loss and many thousands of fans pelted the field, the players, the officials with bottles.

https://www.google.com/search?q=clev...w=1280&bih=911

Part of the problem for the crew was that they failed to communicate to the fans what was going on. If you search youtube, you'll hear the in-game television announcer imploring the crew to talk to the fans so that might be calmed rather than feeling irate and alienated. Instead, they acted out and all hell broke loose.

MLB has taken an odd, narrow-view at replay as well in that there is zero ability for the officials to communicate to the fans or at least the PA announcer to address to fans. If you haven't been to an MLB game during a replay, here's how it happens:

1. The fans watch the replay on the Jumbotron in multiple angles and then react with their sort of jubilant acknowledgement of what the call should be.

2. The umpire has a headset off to the side sort of near someone's batting circle.

3. Finally, the umpire removes the head set and begins walking back to either home plate or to the other umpires and makes one gesture: the "out" call with his fist, or a "safe" call with absolutely no explanation given.

We're only in the first week of the season, but imagine a scenario where two teams are coming down to the playoff race and a botched replay scenario puts the home team in a situation where the fans then feel intentionally slighted. Although I feel baseball fans can act with a modicum more respect than football fans, I've also attended enough drunk festivals at baseball games to know that some fans, en masse, cannot behave themselves. Images of Cleveland fans reigning litter all over left field at Albert Belle, Cubs' fans treatment of Steve Bartman, Disco Demolition Night in Chicago, .10 cent beer night in Cleveland, Tom Gamboa being beaten at the hands of two White Sox fans, Frank Francisco hurling a chair into Oakland's right field seats behind the bullpen... we aren't without our fan incidents and I truly think baseball has not envisioned where this has the potential to go.

Last edited by llowllevellowll; 04-07-2014 at 11:50 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2014, 10:43 PM
 
Location: Amherst
127 posts, read 141,006 times
Reputation: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
The reason that the phantom double play will not be subject to review is the same reason that it came into being in the first place....injury prevention. If the tradition of fudging the rules to allow the "vicinity play" had not come into being, then middle infielders would be required to hang around the bag longer, and collisions with baserunners would be more frequent. An unwritten custom sprang up which held that it was better to avoid injuries then demand precision calls on that particular play. In a sense, the new rules codify the tradition by not covering it.
We all know why this unwritten rule was started. The problem of course is that infielders miss the bag when the runner is no where near them and still get the out. If a SS fails to execute the one thing he's trying to accomplish, he shouldn't be awarded with an out. If they wanted to keep the players safe, they could just eject the runner when he's clearly trying to injure the infielder. It's crystal clear, every time. Runners are allowed to slide 4-5 feet away from the bag in the name of busting up ankles and double plays. The infielder is no more safe standing 10 inches from the bag than he is while standing on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2014, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Virginia
8,114 posts, read 12,685,704 times
Reputation: 3770
Transfer rule focus of Cleveland replay | indians.com: News


A bit confusing to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2014, 06:16 PM
 
Location: San José, CA
3,265 posts, read 5,785,339 times
Reputation: 3201
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgbwc View Post
Completely agree. Major League Baseball rolled out Expanded Instant Replay the same year they roll out this garbage interpretation. Unfortunately, it's not doing Replay any favors because no one agreees with the new interpretation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2014, 12:06 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,259,760 times
Reputation: 36087
Along with the replay, MLB coujld not resist the temptation to make its annual moronic rule where nothing was wrong with the old one. The catch-and-throw rule.

Consider this scenario. With a runner on second, the pitcher tries to bunt with two strikes, and pops it foul down the first base line. The charging first baseman instinctively dives and makes sliding, sprawling catch off the grasstop. the wily baserunner from second sees that he can tag up after the catch, and advance to third. The first baseman, after sprawling and tumbling, gets to his feet, and sees the runner sliding into third. Now here is where the amazing 2014 rule takes effect. The first baseman ***** his arm to throw, and lets the ball dribble off his fingertips behind him, nullifying the catch, creating a dead ball, and sending the runner back to second, with the batter still out for bunting foul on third strike. (Not to mention being ejected for obscenity for saying he ***** his arm.)

Here's another one. Two outs, the batter strikes out, the catcher takes the ball our of his mitt and lets it dribble to the ground while heading for the dugout. Is the runner able to run safely to first base? Is a fielder still required to make a proper baseball throw with a ball,
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2014, 11:37 PM
 
Location: Trumbull/Danbury
6,541 posts, read 4,492,339 times
Reputation: 2472
They need to do something about the transfer rule. Nothing was really THAT wrong with it to begin with, and now every game we get a transfer rule called that's debated. A couple nights ago, it was Adam LaRoche. Caught a line drive with an Angels base runner on second base. Dropped the ball as he was transferring it to throw it back to the pitcher. Batter was ruled safe, Instead of 2 outs in the 9th and the Angels already up by 2 runs, it's only 1 out with runners on first and second. They ended up adding a run in the inning a couple batters latter to go up 3 in the bottom of the 9th. After an Ian Desmond home run to lead off the 9th made it a 2 run game (should've been 1 run), Jayson Werth would've won the game with a 2 RBI double, but because of the ridiculous interpretation of the rules and fixing something that was barely broken to begin with it merely tied the game. However, LaRoche, ironically I might add ended up winning the game with a walk off single 2 pitches later anyways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2014, 01:18 PM
 
Location: San José, CA
3,265 posts, read 5,785,339 times
Reputation: 3201
There have been a plethora of replay disasters so far, but here is the worst to date:

VIDEO: MLB reviews count in Tampa Bay, still gets it wrong - CBSSports.com

Escobar either struck out on 4 pitches, or he was cheated out of a walk. Regardless of which way you go with it, it was quite the epic fail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2014, 10:39 AM
 
698 posts, read 418,961 times
Reputation: 854
The transfer rule is fixed. Just like the "let's call every balk" idea was scrapped some years ago. Both made a shambles of the game. Nobody forces pitchers to throw in 30 seconds or beats up on batters for not getting back in the box on time. Those were also bad ideas. So they died. The neighborhood play has meanwhile always been called and will continue to be. As for replay, it has some problems. But the system itself will expose those problems, and sensible people can then look at solving them. Toughest nut so far seems to be the inate reluctance of umpires in New York to overrule their brother umpires out in the field. Review of close plays doesn't make much sense if you aren't going to change the ones that were wrong anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Baseball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top