A Baseball Purist Responds to Instant Replay Possibility
| 6
|
by Sparty
The idea of an instant replay for "boundary" calls in Major League baseball seems like a poorly calculated decision.
- The umpires are generally correct. More than most sports the MLB umpire crews have had very very few mistakes. There are enough of them on the field that a quick conference generally solves any tricky call appropriately.
- 162 game seasons don't rely on a single HR or fair ball. If the margin for error for your franchise is a single foul ball or HR then quite honestly you've put yourself in that position. Over the course of a 162 game season a team's tendencies for winning and losing will dictate much better whether or not a single call determines the outcome of a season. Look at the single play-in game this year with the Padres & Rockies. If you've put your club in that position, a single call shouldn't have to determine your whole season.
- Adding an extra 5 - 10 minutes to a game. Why add another 5 or 10 minutes to a sport that already has an, undeserved, bad reputation for taking too long. I understand the rule talks about 60-90 seconds for review, but honestly it'll be tossed in with some kind of TV break, and these things ALWAYS take longer. Is it really worth the extra time?
I haven't seen a well argued case for the addition of the instant replay. It's as though the GM's look at other sports and saw that they had it...and decided that it was needed in MLB as well "just because." Ultimately I think the owners will see this one correctly with Bud Selig already arguing against the idea.
I would hate to see yet another distraction added to an already pretty great product. Young pitchers are much more time conscious in their delivery which has had a general trend to speed up the play on the field. Most regular season games have a distinct rhythm to them that Instant Replay would disrupt potentially causing pitchers to tighten up on the mound and risk injury.
