If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   MLB, pending owner approval, will institute a replay challenge system beginning in 2014 - 2 challenges in the first 6 innings, 1 challenge from the 7th inning on, all challenges to be reviewed by an umpire at MLB offices   (espn.go.com) divider line 212
    More: Interesting, Major League Baseball, John Schuerholz, umpire, Joe Torre, systems  
•       •       •

645 clicks; posted to Sports » on 15 Aug 2013 at 2:24 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



212 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-15 02:25:31 PM
Because baseball isn't slow enough.
 
2013-08-15 02:27:37 PM
Different rules during different times in the game. How very football.
 
2013-08-15 02:28:04 PM
It's a step in the right direction.

ariseatex: Because baseball isn't slow enough.


if it gets too bad, just remove the right for a batter to call time after a pitcher is set
 
2013-08-15 02:28:45 PM
Kind of light on the details of how this will exactly work. I'm guessing you can challenge anything except balls and strikes?  Will home runs continue to be at the umpire's discretion, or do you have to use a challenge on those?
 
2013-08-15 02:29:06 PM
Good

Now drop the BS change to affording the league that wins the All Star game home field advantage in the World Series. Next put the DH in the National League as well
 
2013-08-15 02:30:47 PM

ariseatex: Because baseball isn't slow enough.


It won't slow it down.  It will eliminate arguments from the managers- which can take 5+ minutes.  A replay won't take that long.  And I assume once the replay is handed down, the manager who requested it can't argue it.  (For one, the ump who reviewed the play is in a studio in NYC.)
 
2013-08-15 02:33:36 PM

ariseatex: Because baseball isn't slow enough.


Think of it this way - that's more time before the beer sales are cut off.
 
2013-08-15 02:34:17 PM
Probably have Hernandez doing the reviews
 
2013-08-15 02:35:21 PM

ariseatex: Because baseball isn't slow enough.


MLB and NFL games average about the same duration.
 
2013-08-15 02:36:03 PM

Lost Thought 00: It's a step in the right direction.

ariseatex: Because baseball isn't slow enough.

if it gets too bad, just remove the right for a batter to call time after a pitcher is set


I wish they would put this rule in place now. Should also put the pitcher on the clock so they don't make the batter stand there all day as well.
 
2013-08-15 02:36:29 PM
This is a terrible implementation, and I suspect that, once it doesn't work, Bud Selig will just throw his hands up and say "Hey, at least we tried."
 
2013-08-15 02:37:09 PM
how about just farking 1??

/maybe 2.
 
2013-08-15 02:37:36 PM

DeWayne Mann: This is a terrible implementation, and I suspect that, once it doesn't work, Bud Selig will just throw his hands up and say "Hey, at least we tried."


Curious what you don't like about it?
 
2013-08-15 02:38:41 PM
Great, baseball is officially ruined now. The sanctity of the game is forever tarnished.


Peter von Nostrand: Next remove put the DH from in the American National League as well


FTFY
 
2013-08-15 02:39:16 PM
what happens when there are multiple challenges at once?  is there one dedicated replay ump per game or is there one dude who has to review all the replays?
 
2013-08-15 02:39:52 PM

Lost Thought 00: It's a step in the right direction.


If you consider moving an inch "a step." The easiest way to do this was to just have a 5th umpire in the press box with a TV monitor who could review plays before the next batter and if he needed more time to review a play, he could request that play be held up while he does that. It would've been faster and involved less BS than this challenge system will. Instead we'll have the NFL system where you'll see challenges issued just before the next play (pitch, in this case). Instead of a common sense solution (which would've probably brought better umpires to the Majors), Bud Senile strikes again with this stupid concept.
 
2013-08-15 02:40:29 PM

babysealclubber: Great, baseball is officially ruined now. The sanctity of the game is forever tarnished.


It was already ruined before this season started, when they got rid of the fake to third, fake to first - that was ESSENTIAL AND STRATEGIC.

/I keed
 
2013-08-15 02:41:13 PM
I wonder if there will be a stipulation that a manager must challenge without first arguing the call, else you'll still end up with 3-4 minute arguments, followed by the challenge when the manager doesn't get his way.  And will teams attempt to "get the next play off" like they do in football to beat the challenge flag by either throwing the next pitch or a pickoff if the opposing manager doesn't immediately use it?
 
2013-08-15 02:43:11 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Next putdrop the DH in the Nationalfrom the American League as well

 
2013-08-15 02:44:01 PM

babysealclubber: Great, baseball is officially ruined now. The sanctity of the game is forever tarnished.


Peter von Nostrand: Next remove put the DH from in the American National League as well

FTFY


No
 
2013-08-15 02:44:52 PM

usttsdw: Should also put the pitcher on the clock so they don't make the batter stand there all day as well.


Isn't there already a 12-second rule between getting the ball back and throwing the ball? Not that it's enforced, but I thought the rule was there.
 
2013-08-15 02:45:00 PM

Lost Thought 00: if it gets too bad, just remove the right for a batter to call time after a pitcher is set


This wouldn't take a rule change. Players don't have a right to call time; by the rulebook, all they can do is ask for time, and it's up to the ump to decide whether or not to grant it. It's just that umpires always do grant it, unless the player is being a total dick.
 
2013-08-15 02:45:41 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Peter von Nostrand: Next putdrop the DH in the Nationalfrom the American League as well


Then position players need to pitch as well. I'm sorry, what was that, you said having position players pitch is a stupid idea? Exactly
 
2013-08-15 02:47:13 PM

downstairs: DeWayne Mann: This is a terrible implementation, and I suspect that, once it doesn't work, Bud Selig will just throw his hands up and say "Hey, at least we tried."

Curious what you don't like about it?


Pretty much everything.

Why is there a limit on challenges?

Why do the challenges depend on what inning it is? If a game goes to 18 innings, why aren't any more challenges added after the 7th?

Those are just the things that we KNOW that are wrong. There are plenty of other things that I strongly suspect will be in place:

Will the New York officials be allowed to review a play BEFORE the manager throws his flag?

Is there any penalty for losing a challenge (other than the obvious)?

Can a manager throw a flag at any time?

etc, etc.

The idea of replay is SUPPOSED to be "Umpiring is hard. Let's do whatever we can to help them out and get the calls right."

This is "If an ump blows a call, which they probably will because we're not helping them at all, blame the manager for not getting it overturned."
 
2013-08-15 02:48:15 PM

DeWayne Mann: This is a terrible implementation, and I suspect that, once it doesn't work, Bud Selig will just throw his hands up and say "Hey, at least we tried."


Exactly. Challenges are awful, pointless, and will only lead to the stupid delays everyone cries about. All reviews should come from above.
 
2013-08-15 02:50:02 PM

ariseatex: Because baseball isn't slow enough.


And it doesn't have enough tits and splosions.
 
2013-08-15 02:50:45 PM
Need some more details, but good, the human element can eat me.
 
2013-08-15 02:50:45 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Then position players need to pitch as well. I'm sorry, what was that, you said having position players pitch is a stupid idea? Exactly


The O's's Chris Davis pitched a scoreless two-innings a picked a the win last year against the Sawx.

/Then again, he was the DH that day.
 
2013-08-15 02:51:49 PM

Gecko Gingrich: two-innings a picked a the win


...two innings and picked up the win...

/Jaysus
 
2013-08-15 02:51:58 PM

Lost Thought 00: if it gets too bad, just remove the right for a batter to call time after a pitcher is set


Batters have the right to call time, but only the HP umpire can grant it. I'd like to see MLB start (or continue - IIRC they've been getting on the umps to stop letting them call time so damned much) directing umps to only grant time for something above the threshhold of "He's taking too much time, so I've got to re-seat my elbow pad".
 
2013-08-15 02:52:29 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Next put the DH in the National League as well


Hell, why not just prostitute the rest of the game and have separate offensive and defensive squads? We'll have  a much higher quality game then.
 
2013-08-15 02:52:54 PM

Gecko Gingrich: usttsdw: Should also put the pitcher on the clock so they don't make the batter stand there all day as well.

Isn't there already a 12-second rule between getting the ball back and throwing the ball? Not that it's enforced, but I thought the rule was there.


8.04
When the bases are unoccupied, the pitcher shall deliver the ball to the batter within 12 seconds after he receives the ball. Each time the pitcher delays the game by violating this rule, the umpire shall call "Ball." The 12-second timing starts when the pitcher is in possession of the ball and the batter is in the box, alert to the pitcher. The timing stops when the pitcher releases the ball.
The intent of this rule is to avoid unnecessary delays. The umpire shall insist that the catcher return the ball promptly to the pitcher, and that the pitcher take his position on the rubber promptly. Obvious delay by the pitcher should instantly be penalized by the umpire.
 
2013-08-15 02:53:14 PM

DeWayne Mann: downstairs: DeWayne Mann: This is a terrible implementation, and I suspect that, once it doesn't work, Bud Selig will just throw his hands up and say "Hey, at least we tried."

Curious what you don't like about it?

Pretty much everything.


This is just a step in the right direction - you think that they can just implement a system and have it be perfect?  They have to start somewhere, then tweak it to fix problems that arise.

Yes, a limit on challenges based on innings is kinda dumb, especially in the event of extra innings.  (In that regard, tennis does things pretty well, in which they add an extra challenge for a tie-break, and correct challenges do not count against the three each player gets per set.)

I would bet money the NY officials will not throw flags at all - the onus to make a challenge will fall upon the team, not the officials.  Tennis players are responsible for making challenges, and it works out pretty well.  If the team wants to hire somebody to watch the video and call the manager to make a challenge, that wouldn't be too hard.
 
2013-08-15 02:53:19 PM

DeWayne Mann: Pretty much everything.


Not even mentioning the silliness of having it reviewed in the league offices instead of on-site.

I hope there's a huge storm in NYC when it's nice somewhere else and they f*ck up a call and there's a challenge and "well, sorry, we can't reach them - power and phones are out."
 
2013-08-15 02:54:03 PM
1)  subby has it backwards:  1 challenge total during the first 6 innings, 2 total from the seventh on (I don't know if they've already discussed extra innings)

2) I'm sure the final format of this isn't set in stone.  Yes, it would be ideal if there were a dedicated fifth ump, unseen in a control booth to instantaneously view a replay and correct if needed, but it's a lot better than what Angel Hernandez and Joe West are doing right now.

If they're going to go down the challenge route here, wouldn't they need some sort of penalty for an unsuccessful challenge?  They can't really lose a timeout, and gaining an out (or losing one, depending) would be too valuable.  Sounds like they have some issues to iron out on this before they put it in stone.
 
2013-08-15 02:54:15 PM
Other way around - 1 challenge through 6, 2 from 7th on.

Personally, I think any game umped by Angel Hernandez or Joe West should have an additional 5 challenges added.
 
2013-08-15 02:54:49 PM

naughtyrev: Think of it this way - that's more time before the beer sales are cut off.


I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

desertgeek: The easiest way to do this was to just have a 5th umpire in the press box with a TV monitor who could review plays before the next batter and if he needed more time to review a play, he could request that play be held up while he does that.


Unlike football, baseball doesn't have a timeout system. I kind of think that approach would just invite managers to come out and stall for time in the hope that the replay official would stop play.
 
2013-08-15 02:54:50 PM

edmo: Peter von Nostrand: Next put the DH in the National League as well

Hell, why not just prostitute the rest of the game and have separate offensive and defensive squads? We'll have  a much higher quality game then.


Why not just change it to Cricket, then? Or perhaps Rugby.
 
2013-08-15 02:56:03 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Next put the DH in the National League as well


Why stop there?  Why not just have a DH for every position player like football as well?  Have 9 fielders & 9 DHs.  No one wants to see another Ozzie Smith bat .262 anymore.
 
2013-08-15 02:56:26 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Then position players need to pitch as well. I'm sorry, what was that, you said having position players pitch is a stupid idea? Exactly


Also, I'm not sure what your point is. For the first 104, if you played the field you hit. Since '73, half the league still does. College pitchers hit. Little League pitchers hit.
 
2013-08-15 02:56:34 PM

SnatchMcGillicudy: it's a lot better than what Angel Hernandez and Joe West are doing right now.


Is it amusing or sad that we both picked the exact same umpires as bad examples?
 
2013-08-15 02:56:56 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Peter von Nostrand: Then position players need to pitch as well. I'm sorry, what was that, you said having position players pitch is a stupid idea? Exactly

The O's's Chris Davis pitched a scoreless two-innings a picked a the win last year against the Sawx.

/Then again, he was the DH that day.


Every player must play one inning at each position. No substitutions except in the case of injury. That could provide some grand entertainment.
 
2013-08-15 02:57:29 PM
If your genuine desire was to make sure "the best team wins", then you should be looking at the destruction of a system which, at the end of the 100-plus game season, placed the best team from each of the two major leagues into a season-ending playoff.  By its nature and by its rules, baseball is volatile.  Just like football, just like basketball, just like whatever.  That's why (money aside) you create long seasons with long, extended playoff formats: To reduce that volatility.  Instant replay is just a means to making sure the volatility is accurate, and that's pointless.
 
2013-08-15 02:57:50 PM
BTW, just hook up a TV at the place and let the home plate umpire rule on it. It's dumb to have someone not in the building rule on it - if replay is inconclusive or they decide something wrong (see NFL replays sometimes getting overturned into the wrong call, seemingly), the manager goes out and gets mad at the umpire and the umpire can even say "hell, I agree with you."

Not much satisfaction in that and it makes it seem like the game is rigged.

/AFL has the best review system (well, tennis does, but that's not going to happen) - ref goes over and looks at the TV; everyone watching the game can hear him comment as he's watching the replays, explaining what he's looking for and why he's calling what he's calling
 
2013-08-15 02:58:16 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Gecko Gingrich: Peter von Nostrand: Next putdrop the DH in the Nationalfrom the American League as well

Then position players need to pitch as well. I'm sorry, what was that, you said having position players pitch is a stupid idea? Exactly


That argument makes no sense.
 
2013-08-15 02:59:50 PM

Joe_diGriz: SnatchMcGillicudy: it's a lot better than what Angel Hernandez and Joe West are doing right now.

Is it amusing or sad that we both picked the exact same umpires as bad examples?


It's sadmusing. Also because those were the first two guys in my mind as well.
 
2013-08-15 03:00:18 PM

idesofmarch: you think that they can just implement a system and have it be perfect?


Considering that's impossible, no. But anyone with half a functioning brain can up with something better than this.

idesofmarch: They have to start somewhere, then tweak it to fix problems that arise.


So how long until they start "tweaking", and how many "tweaks" until it resembles something even close to good?

Frankly, I'd rather have 1 more season of no replay at all followed by a 5th umpire system than 2 years of this, two more years of "ok, you get challenges back if you win", 3 years of "get 1 new replay after every third extra inning" etc etc.
 
2013-08-15 03:00:47 PM

wxboy: 8.04
When the bases are unoccupied, the pitcher shall deliver the ball to the batter within 12 seconds after he receives the ball. Each time the pitcher delays the game by violating this rule, the umpire shall call "Ball." The 12-second timing starts when the pitcher is in possession of the ball and the batter is in the box, alert to the pitcher. The timing stops when the pitcher releases the ball.
The intent of this rule is to avoid unnecessary delays. The umpire shall insist that the catcher return the ball promptly to the pitcher, and that the pitcher take his position on the rubber promptly. Obvious delay by the pitcher should instantly be penalized by the umpire.


I knew I had heard that somewhere.

/Danke.
 
2013-08-15 03:01:04 PM

Gecko Gingrich: College pitchers hit. Little League pitchers hit.


And by pitchers hit, you mean they have DHs.
 
2013-08-15 03:02:30 PM
Or...just have a guy (an extra ump) watch the television broadcast, and if the play is deemed close enough (by him), then get a couple more angles, slo-mo, whatever, and then he can make the call and send it down to the field.  If the evidence isn't conclusive within a couple quick watches, play stands as it was called.

I don't understand the need for challenges or whatever when we already have TV broadcasts that can fire up a replay within seconds, without having the fat umps have to trot their fat butts off the field for four or five fat minutes to make decisions that viewers can basically make within 15 seconds of the completion of the fat play.
 
2013-08-15 03:04:21 PM

IAmRight: And by pitchers hit, you mean they have DHs.


The NCAA has the DH rule, but a lot of pitchers bat. No American League pitchers bat (barring inter-league play). Little League does not have the DH rule. Your local kids league may, though.
 
2013-08-15 03:05:38 PM

SnatchMcGillicudy: 1)  subby has it backwards:  1 challenge total during the first 6 innings, 2 total from the seventh on (I don't know if they've already discussed extra innings)

2) I'm sure the final format of this isn't set in stone.  Yes, it would be ideal if there were a dedicated fifth ump, unseen in a control booth to instantaneously view a replay and correct if needed, but it's a lot better than what Angel Hernandez and Joe West are doing right now.

If they're going to go down the challenge route here, wouldn't they need some sort of penalty for an unsuccessful challenge?  They can't really lose a timeout, and gaining an out (or losing one, depending) would be too valuable.  Sounds like they have some issues to iron out on this before they put it in stone.


If this is a step forward towards a comprehensive system in the future, I am all for it. The limited addition of replay for home runs was a good step forward and proof of concept. If this is the same, then perfect, but I doubt it will work that way.

This basic system will become the only option for at least a decade. If it is deemed a failure, it will be removed outright and those afraid of change will just say "see we told you replay was a dumb idea" with evidence behind them. But if it works then baseball's massive inertia kicks in again and between the people objecting to any change and the people wanting to remove replay there will not be any expansion for at least a decade.
 
2013-08-15 03:06:07 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Peter von Nostrand: Then position players need to pitch as well. I'm sorry, what was that, you said having position players pitch is a stupid idea? Exactly

Also, I'm not sure what your point is. For the first 104, if you played the field you hit. Since '73, half the league still does. College pitchers hit. Little League pitchers hit.


NCAA baseball has a dh. But since at that level, a lot of pitchers can rake, a player can do both. So the starter can pitch and hit but when you go to the bullpen the reliever doesn't have to bat.
 
2013-08-15 03:07:29 PM

dywed88: This basic system will become the only option for at least a decade. If it is deemed a failure, it will be removed outright and those afraid of change will just say "see we told you replay was a dumb idea" with evidence behind them. But if it works then baseball's massive inertia kicks in again and between the people objecting to any change and the people wanting to remove replay there will not be any expansion for at least a decade.


I don't generally do this, but

THIS
 
2013-08-15 03:09:56 PM

IAmRight: DeWayne Mann: Pretty much everything.

Not even mentioning the silliness of having it reviewed in the league offices instead of on-site.

I hope there's a huge storm in NYC when it's nice somewhere else and they f*ck up a call and there's a challenge and "well, sorry, we can't reach them - power and phones are out."


The NHL has handled this for a decade during winter in Toronto.

Great derp though.


As for the proposed system, I would have the replay be called for by the central office instead of a challenge system.
 
2013-08-15 03:10:01 PM

dywed88: This basic system will become the only option for at least a decade. If it is deemed a failure, it will be removed outright and those afraid of change will just say "see we told you replay was a dumb idea" with evidence behind them. But if it works then baseball's massive inertia kicks in again and between the people objecting to any change and the people wanting to remove replay there will not be any expansion for at least a decade.


Bingo.

The system is so flawed that either a) it's set up for failure, or b) fixing it will be deemed "too hard", and therefore it'll never be touched again.

DeWayne Mann: Frankly, I'd rather have 1 more season of no replay at all followed by a 5th umpire system


At least Selig might be out of the way by then.
 
2013-08-15 03:11:02 PM

Joe_diGriz: At least Selig might be out of the way by then.


Hahaha, you think Selig is going away at some point.
 
2013-08-15 03:13:02 PM

DeWayne Mann: Hahaha, you think Selig is going away at some point.


Hey, I did say *might be*.
 
2013-08-15 03:13:04 PM

babysealclubber: Peter von Nostrand: Gecko Gingrich: Peter von Nostrand: Next putdrop the DH in the Nationalfrom the American League as well

Then position players need to pitch as well. I'm sorry, what was that, you said having position players pitch is a stupid idea? Exactly

That argument makes no sense.


Well, if you say so

Gecko Gingrich: Peter von Nostrand: Then position players need to pitch as well. I'm sorry, what was that, you said having position players pitch is a stupid idea? Exactly

Also, I'm not sure what your point is. For the first 104, if you played the field you hit. Since '73, half the league still does. College pitchers hit. Little League pitchers hit.


They used to also ride trains when traveling but then times change and now teams fly. Uh no on college, there is a DH in college. Little League play with a 45' mound and 60' bases, why not go to that as well?
 
2013-08-15 03:13:17 PM

Peter von Nostrand: put the DH in the National League as well


You mean remove the DH from the American League, surely.
 
2013-08-15 03:14:05 PM

usttsdw: just remove the right for a batter to call time after a pitcher is set

I wish they would put this rule in place now. Should also put the pitcher on the clock so they don't make the batter stand there all day as well.


I've long asked for a rule where once the batter steps in the box, he can't step out.  Step out = strike.  On one hand, you need to give the pitcher a few seconds to recover before the next pitch, but the, "step out, 4-5 practice swings, deep breath, check the signs at 3d, practice swing, adjust wrist wraps, call time, dig in...."  stupid.


downstairs: It will eliminate arguments from the managers- which can take 5+ minutes. A replay won't take that long. And I assume once the replay is handed down, the manager who requested it can't argue it. (For one, the ump who reviewed the play is in a studio in NYC.)


yeah, i don't think it will hugely delay things.  it will but not as much.  and once it happens, it is done.
 
2013-08-15 03:14:53 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Little League play with a 45' mound and 60' bases


I know what you meant, I'm just imagining 12-year-olds dropping baseballs off a scissor lift parked in the middle of the infield.
 
2013-08-15 03:15:39 PM

Gunderson: Peter von Nostrand: Next put the DH in the National League as well

Why stop there?  Why not just have a DH for every position player like football as well?  Have 9 fielders & 9 DHs.  No one wants to see another Ozzie Smith bat .262 anymore.


Wat?
 
2013-08-15 03:16:10 PM

PowerSlacker: The NHL has handled this for a decade during winter in Toronto.

Great derp though.


Wow, 10 whole years! BTW, it was a dumbass system when it was created:

"We always relied on the people in the arena to take care of this and advise us on this," Murphy said, "so if there's a wraparound play at the L.A. net, I'd have to call and say, 'What have you got in your overheads?' L.A.'s got some real good video goal judges but other teams' aren't as good as L.A.'s, so you're relying on a third party to make a decision for you on a very important part of the game."

So you had people at the game doing the same job, basically, but you had to have someone at the head office call it, based on input from them. And you call the people AT THE GAME "third parties."

Well, I suppose they're doing a good job of creating jobs.
 
2013-08-15 03:18:35 PM

wxboy: Peter von Nostrand: Little League play with a 45' mound and 60' bases

I know what you meant, I'm just imagining 12-year-olds dropping baseballs off a scissor lift parked in the middle of the infield.


As soon as I hit add comment I saw that and thought of it in that way
 
2013-08-15 03:19:26 PM
In any case, any baseball that doesn't have every player play one inning at every position is horsesh*t pussy baseball.

While we're banning the DH, let's also ban relief pitchers. Pitchers pitch once a week anyway, how hard is it to make it through a game?
 
2013-08-15 03:19:56 PM

PowerSlacker: As for the proposed system, I would have the replay be called for by the central office instead of a challenge system.


The problem with this is that the central office has to be viewing all angles of every play of every game simultaneously. If you're going to have this goofy thing, instead of the far-more-intelligent 5th umpire system, it's better to at least have the people *at the game* decide if something should be looked at.
 
2013-08-15 03:20:20 PM

Peter von Nostrand: wxboy: Peter von Nostrand: Little League play with a 45' mound and 60' bases

I know what you meant, I'm just imagining 12-year-olds dropping baseballs off a scissor lift parked in the middle of the infield.

As soon as I hit add comment I saw that and thought of it in that way


That would eliminate the danger posed by comebackers.

/just don't put them up there on a windy day
 
2013-08-15 03:20:25 PM

Peter von Nostrand: They used to also ride trains when traveling but then times change and now teams fly.


Not always. Buses, trains and planes are used depending on distance.

Peter von Nostrand: Uh no on college, there is a DH in college.


That's been covered. See above.

Peter von Nostrand: Little League play with a 45' mound and 60' bases, why not go to that as well?


Ah, I see I'm arguing with an idiot. My bad. Won't happen again.
 
2013-08-15 03:20:44 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Gunderson: Peter von Nostrand: Next put the DH in the National League as well

Why stop there?  Why not just have a DH for every position player like football as well?  Have 9 fielders & 9 DHs.  No one wants to see another Ozzie Smith bat .262 anymore.

Wat?


If you're going to let one fielder get out of batting, why not all of them?
 
2013-08-15 03:21:07 PM

DeWayne Mann: Joe_diGriz: At least Selig might be out of the way by then.

Hahaha, you think Selig is going away at some point.


He IS retiring soon. That's why he's spearheading the PED witch hunt, so his legacy isn't "the guy who violated federal law on the way to canceling the world series"
 
2013-08-15 03:21:34 PM

DeWayne Mann: Frankly, I'd rather have 1 more season of no replay at all followed by a 5th umpire system than 2 years of this, two more years of "ok, you get challenges back if you win", 3 years of "get 1 new replay after every third extra inning" etc etc.


I think that the current proposal is a half-measure to appease those wanting replay without going too overboard with the purists.  I hope that changes can be made year by year, because I don't think you'll need more than one year to determine what's working and what needs fixing.
 
2013-08-15 03:22:14 PM

IAmRight: Pitchers pitch once a week anyway, how hard is it to make it through a game?


snakes had a stretch this season against either Padres or Giants where the other team burned three relievers in 4 pitches.  it was like, one pitch one hit, new pitcher, one pitch one hit, new pitcher, strike, hit, new reliever.  those 4 pitches took at least 5 minutes to get through with the pitching change.
 
2013-08-15 03:22:57 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Peter von Nostrand: put the DH in the National League as well

You mean remove the DH from the American League, surely.


Of course not. And quit calling me surely
 
2013-08-15 03:23:59 PM

Marcus Aurelius: If you're going to let one fielder get out of batting, why not all of them?


I think it's pretty damn clear that a pitcher is not simply a fielder. Pitching is more work than all the other positions combined.
 
2013-08-15 03:25:45 PM
A modest proposal to address extra innings: If they're going with 3 challenges for 9 innings, why not just say 3 challenges instead of the cockamamie '1 challenge in the first 6, 2 challenges in the last 3' system being floated about. Now you average one per 3 innings of play, so with that established, you can give another challenge to start the 10th (and you can use it in the 10th, 11th or 12th), another challenge to start the 13th, etc.
 
2013-08-15 03:26:42 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Peter von Nostrand: They used to also ride trains when traveling but then times change and now teams fly.

Not always. Buses, trains and planes are used depending on distance.

Peter von Nostrand: Uh no on college, there is a DH in college.

That's been covered. See above.

Peter von Nostrand: Little League play with a 45' mound and 60' bases, why not go to that as well?

Ah, I see I'm arguing with an idiot. My bad. Won't happen again.


I'm the idiot? Okay. You made a false comparison because in Little League as well as College, a DH can be used. If you don't like the DH that's fine with me. Just say so. Don't invent BS arguments and then tell me I'm an idiot because you used a false argument. The point of what I'm saying is that it's not really relevant what other levels of the sport use. The game is basically the same other than some minor differences
 
2013-08-15 03:26:51 PM

ElwoodCuse: He IS retiring soon.


So how are things in 2011?

Wait did I say 2011? I meant 2008.

...2006?

...2003? oh wait, that was the exact same link, because even in 2006 the "Bud is going to retire soon" thing was a joke.
 
2013-08-15 03:28:32 PM

Lost Thought 00: if it gets too bad, just remove the right for a batter to call time after a pitcher is set


Also, please enforce:

MLB Rule 8.04 When the bases are unoccupied, the pitcher shall deliver the ball to the batter within 12 seconds after he receives the ball. Each time the pitcher delays the game by violating this rule, the umpire shall call "Ball."

MLB Rule 5.10 The ball becomes dead when an umpire calls "Time." The umpire-in-chief shall call "Time"-
(a) When in his judgment weather, darkness or similar conditions make immediate further play impossible;
(b) When light failure makes it difficult or impossible for the umpires to follow the play;  NOTE: A league may adopt its own regulations governing games interrupted by light failure.
(c) When an accident incapacitates a player or an umpire;
(1) If an accident to a runner is such as to prevent him from proceeding to a base to which he is entitled, as on a home run hit out of the playing field, or an award of one or more bases, a substitute runner shall be permitted to complete the play.
(d) When a manager requests "Time" for a substitution, or for a conference with one of his players.
(e) When the umpire wishes to examine the ball, to consult with either manager, or for any similar cause.
(f) When a fielder, after catching a fly ball, falls into a bench or stand, or falls across ropes into a crowd when spectators are on the field. As pertains to runners, the provisions
of 7.04(c) shall prevail.  If a fielder after making a catch steps into a bench, but does not fall, the ball is in play and runners may advance at their own peril.
(g) When an umpire orders a player or any other person removed from the playing field.
(h) Except in the cases stated in paragraphs (b) and (c)(1) of this rule, no umpire shall call "Time" while a play is in progress.

In other words, "I want to scratch myself and play with my batting glove" is not cause for the umpire to call "Time".
 
2013-08-15 03:29:35 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Peter von Nostrand: Gunderson: Peter von Nostrand: Next put the DH in the National League as well

Why stop there?  Why not just have a DH for every position player like football as well?  Have 9 fielders & 9 DHs.  No one wants to see another Ozzie Smith bat .262 anymore.

Wat?

If you're going to let one fielder get out of batting, why not all of them?


I understand the idea of what you're getting and that's fine. I think everyone knows that a pitcher is not the same as a regular position player. If you want to take it to the logical extreme, that's fine
 
2013-08-15 03:30:01 PM

idesofmarch: I hope that changes can be made year by year, because I don't think you'll need more than one year to determine what's working and what needs fixing.


You know what else can be fixed after a year?

World Series advantage from the ASG.

Having a single wild-card play-in game.

Jeffrey Loria being allowed to own a team.

And yet....
 
2013-08-15 03:30:12 PM
If you're going to have umpires/referrees, then don't use video.  If you're going to use video, then just computerize the whole damn thing. ok?

These artificial restrictions on video reviews are just crap, when we could just automate the whole damn officiating system.

Especially with the neato awesome Matrix camera system.
 
2013-08-15 03:31:13 PM
How about you get three challenges/free baserunners/free outs (maximum 1 per inning on baserunners)?

If you don't use your challenges, you get to put a guy on base to start the inning. Or, on defense, you can use it as a free out to start the inning. Neither affects player stats, but the batter would have to either go to first base or be out.

/all you "what about the strategy?" whiners should love this
 
2013-08-15 03:32:33 PM

DeWayne Mann: idesofmarch: I hope that changes can be made year by year, because I don't think you'll need more than one year to determine what's working and what needs fixing.

You know what else can be fixed after a year?

World Series advantage from the ASG.

Having a single wild-card play-in game.

Jeffrey Loria being allowed to own a team.

And yet....


Yeah, agree on all points there.  Although I do kinda like the single wild card game, since it does put emphasis back on winning the division, and that was useful.
 
2013-08-15 03:33:07 PM

Joe_diGriz: Other way around - 1 challenge through 6, 2 from 7th on.

Personally, I think any game umped by Angel Hernandez or Joe West should have an additional 5 challenges added.


That's even dumber.  Why do I get one challenge for six innings, then two in three innings?  Last I checked, the game of baseball adds up the runs from all the innings equally.  This isn't Jeopardy.
 
2013-08-15 03:34:25 PM

ekdikeo4: If you're going to have umpires/referrees, then don't use video.  If you're going to use video, then just computerize the whole damn thing. ok?

These artificial restrictions on video reviews are just crap, when we could just automate the whole damn officiating system.

Especially with the neato awesome Matrix camera system.


Have to disagree - tennis does things very effectively using a combination.  You have the chair and the linesmen make the calls, but the computers are brought in on the event of a challenge.  Sure, you could get rid of the linesmen, but they are faster than the computer (for the moment).  You really do get the best of both worlds.
 
2013-08-15 03:34:26 PM

idesofmarch: Although I do kinda like the single wild card game, since it does put emphasis back on winning the division, and that was useful.


I've got no issue with a second wild card.

But it needs to be a 3 game series. A single game is just stupid. It's the exact same as a tiebreaker....except the teams are not necessarily tied.
 
2013-08-15 03:34:41 PM

IAmRight: If you don't use your challenges, you get to put a guy on base to start the inning. Or, on defense, you can use it as a free out to start the inning. Neither affects player stats, but the batter would have to either go to first base or be out.


Well, this potatoed quickly.  Calvinball threads are under the "geek" tab.
 
2013-08-15 03:35:19 PM

NewWorldDan: naughtyrev: Think of it this way - that's more time before the beer sales are cut off.

I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

desertgeek: The easiest way to do this was to just have a 5th umpire in the press box with a TV monitor who could review plays before the next batter and if he needed more time to review a play, he could request that play be held up while he does that.

Unlike football, baseball doesn't have a timeout system. I kind of think that approach would just invite managers to come out and stall for time in the hope that the replay official would stop play.


Well, there's a couple of ways to work around that:

If you put the replay ump in a room that's visible to the field, you could give him some way of signaling to the stadium that he's reviewing the play (I've suggested on here in the past a red, yellow and green light thing with yellow meaning the play is under review and red and green should be obvious). If everyone knows the play is being reviewed, the manager has no need to come out and delay.

If that doesn't work, managers could be allowed 1 or 2 such "arguments" per game and any other time he comes out, he has to make a substitution. If that happens while on offense, the next batter has to be pinch hit for (it doesn't matter who that batter is).
 
2013-08-15 03:35:27 PM

chimp_ninja: That's even dumber. Why do I get one challenge for six innings, then two in three innings? Last I checked, the game of baseball adds up the runs from all the innings equally. This isn't Jeopardy.


So that in 20 years, we can say "No one was a better clutch challenger than Mike Matheny."
 
2013-08-15 03:36:42 PM

chimp_ninja: That's even dumber. Why do I get one challenge for six innings, then two in three innings? Last I checked, the game of baseball adds up the runs from all the innings equally. This isn't Jeopardy.


I dunno.... I find the thought of managers having to bet a number of "runs" that they're right amusing somehow.
 
2013-08-15 03:40:12 PM

DeWayne Mann: So that in 20 years, we can say "No one was a better clutch challenger than Mike Matheny."


that's farking funny
 
2013-08-15 03:41:27 PM
Shockingly, it sounds like the managers don't like this plan.

I wonder why.
 
2013-08-15 03:41:30 PM

chimp_ninja: That's even dumber. Why do I get one challenge for six innings, then two in three innings? Last I checked, the game of baseball adds up the runs from all the innings equally. This isn't Jeopardy.


And why do teams put so much emphasis on having a dedicated closer in the bullpen?
 
2013-08-15 03:42:11 PM

IAmRight: BTW, just hook up a TV at the place and let the home plate umpire rule on it. It's dumb to have someone not in the building rule on it - if replay is inconclusive or they decide something wrong (see NFL replays sometimes getting overturned into the wrong call, seemingly), the manager goes out and gets mad at the umpire and the umpire can even say "hell, I agree with you."

Not much satisfaction in that and it makes it seem like the game is rigged.

/AFL has the best review system (well, tennis does, but that's not going to happen) - ref goes over and looks at the TV; everyone watching the game can hear him comment as he's watching the replays, explaining what he's looking for and why he's calling what he's calling


What is the benefit of having the home plate ump involved? In fact it runs into the issue of having a vested interest in the call that prevents corrections already. And it will be the move that adds more time to the game.

As for arguing, any sane replay system will include a clause that if anyone interupts the game to argue a replay call they are instantly ejected (and, after a season to get used to it, I would like to add a suspension initially of one game but increasing by one game each time an individual is in violation over a season, but this isn't essential) and a corrolary, if you take actions to delay the game, you can no longer challenge it.
 
2013-08-15 03:44:51 PM

chimp_ninja: IAmRight: If you don't use your challenges, you get to put a guy on base to start the inning. Or, on defense, you can use it as a free out to start the inning. Neither affects player stats, but the batter would have to either go to first base or be out.

Well, this potatoed quickly.  Calvinball threads are under the "geek" tab.


C'mon, some people REALLY REALLY REALLY like the "strategy" of the game. Let's actually make managers use some strategy!

/baseball is by far the easiest sport to deal with, strategy-wise
 
2013-08-15 03:47:40 PM

DeWayne Mann: idesofmarch: Although I do kinda like the single wild card game, since it does put emphasis back on winning the division, and that was useful.

I've got no issue with a second wild card.

But it needs to be a 3 game series. A single game is just stupid. It's the exact same as a tiebreaker....except the teams are not necessarily tied.


Yes, I could see going three games - the challenge would be making room for it in the schedule, which has been debated ad nauseum, with the answer being that there is no good way to do that and still please everybody.
 
2013-08-15 03:48:42 PM

DeWayne Mann: chimp_ninja: That's even dumber. Why do I get one challenge for six innings, then two in three innings? Last I checked, the game of baseball adds up the runs from all the innings equally. This isn't Jeopardy.

So that in 20 years, we can say "No one was a better clutch challenger than Mike Matheny."


And there appears to be no reason not to use your two challenges.

I wonder if Jim Leyland or someone similarly feisty will start burning two challenges in any game where the umpire pisses him off.  Like 9th-inning, 2 outs, single to left-center, Jim Leyland asks for a ruling to check if the ball was a home run.  Then re-appeal the same play afterwards, to get a ruling if it was a foul ball.
 
2013-08-15 03:49:16 PM

dywed88: What is the benefit of having the home plate ump involved?


Because you're not taking the game away from the field.

dywed88: In fact it runs into the issue of having a vested interest in the call that prevents corrections already. And it will be the move that adds more time to the game.


a) everyone that complains about the length of time a baseball game takes is not a baseball fan
b) if your concern is that an umpire is going to intentionally, upon review, claim he's right despite obvious visual evidence that he's wrong, he should not be employed. That's not a flaw of the system - that's a flaw in your hiring/retaining process.
 
2013-08-15 03:51:06 PM

chimp_ninja: And there appears to be no reason not to use your two challenges.


Except if you can add baserunners or make it a little easier to get three outs!

/stop taking it so seriously, it's just baseball, everyone
 
2013-08-15 03:52:18 PM

wxboy: chimp_ninja: That's even dumber. Why do I get one challenge for six innings, then two in three innings? Last I checked, the game of baseball adds up the runs from all the innings equally. This isn't Jeopardy.

And why do teams put so much emphasis on having a dedicated closer in the bullpen?


I still like the idea of an 'opener'.  You know the other team is going to put their three best hitters in the top 4 slots.  Have a (random, not necessarily 'best') reliever pitch the 1st inning, since even mediocre relievers tend to outperform starters for 1 inning.  Heck, you can pick by platoon advantage.

Makes more sense than saving your best pitcher to face the 6-7-8 guys with a 3-run lead in the 9th.  And CGs are so rare now that you're not really 'wasting' a bullpen inning.
 
2013-08-15 03:52:33 PM

IAmRight: Marcus Aurelius: If you're going to let one fielder get out of batting, why not all of them?

I think it's pretty damn clear that a pitcher is not simply a fielder. Pitching is more work than all the other positions combined.


I agree, but it's just personal preference to me to see all 9 guys bat.
 
2013-08-15 03:54:41 PM
As someone that loves insane manager / umpire confrontations, I completely disapprove of a replay / challenge system.
 
2013-08-15 03:55:31 PM

Renob: Or...just have a guy (an extra ump) watch the television broadcast, and if the play is deemed close enough (by him), then get a couple more angles, slo-mo, whatever, and then he can make the call and send it down to the field.  If the evidence isn't conclusive within a couple quick watches, play stands as it was called.

I don't understand the need for challenges or whatever when we already have TV broadcasts that can fire up a replay within seconds, without having the fat umps have to trot their fat butts off the field for four or five fat minutes to make decisions that viewers can basically make within 15 seconds of the completion of the fat play.


Umps sound fat.
 
2013-08-15 03:55:49 PM

idesofmarch: Yes, I could see going three games - the challenge would be making room for it in the schedule, which has been debated ad nauseum, with the answer being that there is no good way to do that and still please everybody.


(Day off after the end of the regular season)
Day 1: Day game at the worse team's stadium.
Day 2: Night game at the better team's stadium.
Day 3: Day game at the better team's stadium
Day 4: Night game at the best divisional leader's stadium (ALDS).

Sweep the series, earn a day off.

You could even conceivably combine game 2 & 3 into a doubleheader...but then you lose the "day off" reward.

For the divisional leaders, they get a break exactly the same length as the ASG, so it won't be so long that they get all messed up (that is....unless the ASG break has gotten too long....)
 
2013-08-15 03:56:47 PM

IAmRight: Marcus Aurelius: If you're going to let one fielder get out of batting, why not all of them?

I think it's pretty damn clear that a pitcher is not simply a fielder. Pitching is more work than all the other positions combined.


So what?  They batted anyway, up until the AL decided that the DH would fill the park with more morans.  It does not make the game better - quite the opposite.
 
2013-08-15 03:57:04 PM

chimp_ninja: And there appears to be no reason not to use your two challenges.

I wonder if Jim Leyland or someone similarly feisty will start burning two challenges in any game where the umpire pisses him off. Like 9th-inning, 2 outs, single to left-center, Jim Leyland asks for a ruling to check if the ball was a home run. Then re-appeal the same play afterwards, to get a ruling if it was a foul ball.


Use them to get a reliever warmed up. Or to ice the opposing pitcher.
 
2013-08-15 03:57:56 PM

wxboy: chimp_ninja: That's even dumber. Why do I get one challenge for six innings, then two in three innings? Last I checked, the game of baseball adds up the runs from all the innings equally. This isn't Jeopardy.

And why do teams put so much emphasis on having a dedicated closer in the bullpen?


Because they are easily susceptible to superstition.
 
2013-08-15 03:58:23 PM

babysealclubber: I agree, but it's just personal preference to me to see all 9 guys bat.


It's personal preference for me to not see .220 hitters get intentionally walked to face someone even more pathetic.

/really would like to see a game where everyone has to play each position for an inning and hit
 
2013-08-15 03:59:49 PM

chimp_ninja: DeWayne Mann: chimp_ninja: That's even dumber. Why do I get one challenge for six innings, then two in three innings? Last I checked, the game of baseball adds up the runs from all the innings equally. This isn't Jeopardy.

So that in 20 years, we can say "No one was a better clutch challenger than Mike Matheny."

And there appears to be no reason not to use your two challenges.

I wonder if Jim Leyland or someone similarly feisty will start burning two challenges in any game where the umpire pisses him off.  Like 9th-inning, 2 outs, single to left-center, Jim Leyland asks for a ruling to check if the ball was a home run.  Then re-appeal the same play afterwards, to get a ruling if it was a foul ball.


As amusing as that would be, I would hope that abuse of the challenge system becomes an unwritten rule, like not bunting to break up a perfect game, or stealing bases while during a blowout.
 
2013-08-15 04:00:23 PM

DeWayne Mann: Use them to get a reliever warmed up. Or to ice the opposing pitcher.


My thoughts too.  Those challenges would be used even if there was really nothing to dispute.
 
2013-08-15 04:00:25 PM

azmoviez: As someone that loves insane manager / umpire confrontations, I completely disapprove of a replay / challenge system.



there hasn't been a good one in awhile.....i kinda recall Girardi or maybe Francona having to be restrained by his players a few years back but nothing comes to mind in like, the last 5 or so years.

kinda recall Gardy going nuts but that was like, a  decade ago.
 
2013-08-15 04:03:07 PM

Marcus Aurelius: So what?  They batted anyway, up until the AL decided that the DH would fill the park with more morans.  It does not make the game better - quite the opposite.


So what? We used to sh*t in outhouses too until people came up with indoor plumbing. Can you still get by sh*tting in an outhouse? Sure, just like you can get by watching once-a-week players doing everyday players' jobs. The rest of us will try to progress in life and use things that perform better every day.
 
2013-08-15 04:07:29 PM
Do the managers get a red hankie to throw onto the field?
 
2013-08-15 04:08:15 PM
FTA: Managers will be allowed one challenge over the first six innings of a game and two from the seventh inning until the completion of the game. Calls that are challenged will be reviewed by a crew in MLB headquarters in New York City, which will make a final ruling.

Ok, someone is wrong, and seeing as how this is FARK, I'm looking at subby.
 
2013-08-15 04:10:32 PM

Earguy: Do the managers get a red hankie to throw onto the field?



they'll throw A-Rod's purse
 
2013-08-15 04:11:30 PM
Of all the major professional sports, Baseball is the one that needs the least amount of human officiating.  In basketball, hockey and football, refs are essential for being in charge of the flow of the game and essentially running the game, as well as calling penalties and signalling scoring and such.

Baseball on the other hand could be done with two officials. One on the field, one in a replay booth. Balls and strikes could be done by a completely automated system.  The official on the field keeps the game flowing, makes calls where applicable, and all things such as foul balls, plays at the plate, home runs, checked swings and stuff like that could all be done by the official in the booth with access to all the cameras at once.

The errors made by the officials would be tiny compared to the current system and there would be no slowdown in the game.
 
2013-08-15 04:12:11 PM

IAmRight: Marcus Aurelius: If you're going to let one fielder get out of batting, why not all of them?

I think it's pretty damn clear that a pitcher is not simply a fielder. Pitching is more work than all the other positions combined.


cdn.fansided.com
 
2013-08-15 04:13:17 PM
I'm not gonna get sucked into another DH thread, but again, for the record:

The worst hitting position player in history is almost certainly Bill Bergen. Bergen had a career wRC+ of 22, where 100 is average and higher is better.

As a group, pitchers haven't had a better wRC+ than 22 in a season since 1951, when they had a wRC+ of 24.

They haven't had a wRC+ greater than ZERO since 1982.  That doesn't really mean anything, it's just sort of insane.
 
2013-08-15 04:16:39 PM

IAmRight: Marcus Aurelius: So what?  They batted anyway, up until the AL decided that the DH would fill the park with more morans.  It does not make the game better - quite the opposite.

So what? We used to sh*t in outhouses too until people came up with indoor plumbing. Can you still get by sh*tting in an outhouse? Sure, just like you can get by watching once-a-week players doing everyday players' jobs. The rest of us will try to progress in life and use things that perform better every day.


In that case, why not replace the batters with machines?  They could hit the ball much better than a human.  That would be the kind of progress you could get behind.
 
2013-08-15 04:18:36 PM

DeWayne Mann: I'm not gonna get sucked into another DH thread, but again, for the record:

The worst hitting position player in history is almost certainly Bill Bergen. Bergen had a career wRC+ of 22, where 100 is average and higher is better.

As a group, pitchers haven't had a better wRC+ than 22 in a season since 1951, when they had a wRC+ of 24.

They haven't had a wRC+ greater than ZERO since 1982.  That doesn't really mean anything, it's just sort of insane.


To me, it just seems logical to have the DH in the NL now. The lines have been blurred greatly over the years between the leagues. They used to have a NL and an AL president. The leagues had separate umpires. There was no interleague play except for the All-Star Game and World Series. The DH has been around since 1973. That's 40 years and it is clearly here to stay and MLB wouldn't be able to eliminate it if they wanted to, because of the MLBPA. Just add it to the NL already. While my personal tastes would rather see no DH at all, I understand the logic at this point.
 
2013-08-15 04:19:08 PM

rickythepenguin: azmoviez: As someone that loves insane manager / umpire confrontations, I completely disapprove of a replay / challenge system.


there hasn't been a good one in awhile.....i kinda recall Girardi or maybe Francona having to be restrained by his players a few years back but nothing comes to mind in like, the last 5 or so years.

kinda recall Gardy going nuts but that was like, a  decade ago.


I remember Brenly throwing a ball into the stands forever and a day ago. They don't have as many freakouts as they used to and I think it's a detriment to the game. Maybe because guys like Clint Hurdle and Buck Showalter have winning clubs?  Who knows?

Of course I just found this, which is highly entertaining.
 
2013-08-15 04:19:53 PM

Marcus Aurelius: IAmRight: Marcus Aurelius: So what?  They batted anyway, up until the AL decided that the DH would fill the park with more morans.  It does not make the game better - quite the opposite.

So what? We used to sh*t in outhouses too until people came up with indoor plumbing. Can you still get by sh*tting in an outhouse? Sure, just like you can get by watching once-a-week players doing everyday players' jobs. The rest of us will try to progress in life and use things that perform better every day.

In that case, why not replace the batters with machines?  They could hit the ball much better than a human.  That would be the kind of progress you could get behind.


videogamecritic.com

It's been done.
 
2013-08-15 04:20:40 PM
So basically they've adopted the NFL replay system without having to install a TV/DVR system in every stadium.

If they can do the reviews as quickly as they do in the NHL it sounds good to me.
 
2013-08-15 04:21:10 PM

The Downfall: To me, it just seems logical to have the DH in the NL now.


It almost certainly will happen. Year long interleague pretty well decided that.
 
2013-08-15 04:23:02 PM

Guelph35: So basically they've adopted the NFL replay system without having to install a TV/DVR system in every stadium.

If they can do the reviews as quickly as they do in the NHL it sounds good to me.


Have you seen their review process?  They all have to file into the basement and hang out down there for some reason.
 
2013-08-15 04:24:01 PM

azmoviez: rickythepenguin: azmoviez: As someone that loves insane manager / umpire confrontations, I completely disapprove of a replay / challenge system.


there hasn't been a good one in awhile.....i kinda recall Girardi or maybe Francona having to be restrained by his players a few years back but nothing comes to mind in like, the last 5 or so years.

kinda recall Gardy going nuts but that was like, a  decade ago.

I remember Brenly throwing a ball into the stands forever and a day ago. They don't have as many freakouts as they used to and I think it's a detriment to the game. Maybe because guys like Clint Hurdle and Buck Showalter have winning clubs?  Who knows?

Of course I just found this, which is highly entertaining.


Weaver > *
 
2013-08-15 04:25:47 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Good

Now drop the BS change to affording the league that wins the All Star game home field advantage in the World Series. Next put the DH in the National League as well get rid of the DH altogether and let AL pitchers play the game the way it is meant to be played.


FTFY.
 
2013-08-15 04:29:40 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Have you seen their review process?  They all have to file into the basement and hang out down there for some reason


Usually by the time the replay was shown twice on TV they had their decision.

It isn't as good theater as watching the NFL official go under the hood and watch  pr0n the play but it seemed much faster.
 
2013-08-15 04:30:31 PM
i.imgur.com


Finally. As long as Joe West and Bob Davidson aren't in the replay booth we'll be OK.
 
2013-08-15 04:37:22 PM
I love that this takes a dumb element from football replay (replay on challenges only, so you give the coach something else to fark up) and a dumb element from hockey replay (that you have to get on the phone with the league office and have someone there review it) and combines them into one dumb system.
 
2013-08-15 04:41:03 PM
Years ago when I was in high school, I was house/dog sitting for a neighbor, and I was w/o a car at the time plus the weather was absolutely atrocious that day, so I was essentially stuck indoors. The only thing on television remotely watchable was a single baseball game involving Steve Trachsel. I think it took 4 hours just to get to the 8th inning.

So, all the instant replay in the world including a new 7th inning stretch ritual which includes a public reading of the Magna Carta in several different languages won't make the game any slower that that guy.
 
2013-08-15 04:41:58 PM

Marcus Aurelius: why not replace the batters with machines? They could hit the ball much better than a human. That would be the kind of progress you could get behind.


Baseball ROBOT WARS.  Nine foot tall men of steel and hydrolics hitting the ball 500 feet.  There'd better be brawls.  I'm there.
 
2013-08-15 04:49:45 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Good

Now drop the BS change to affording the league that wins the All Star game home field advantage in the World Series. Next put the DH in the National League as well


Go away.
 
2013-08-15 04:50:26 PM
Each and every play should also be reviewed thoroughly by a staff of lawyers for each team. Then negotiations can ensue and, if all parties agree, a settlement can be reached and play can resume. If an agreement is not possible, a specially selected, neutral arbitrator can then go back over all the evidence and arguments and make a ruling. If either side disagrees, the play can then be brought to an appellate level, and eventually on to the commissioner who is the supreme authority. Play is then swiftly resumed.
 
2013-08-15 04:50:53 PM

Earguy: Baseball ROBOT WARS. Nine foot tall men of steel and hydrolics hitting the ball 500 feet. There'd better be brawls. I'm there.


Watching Wireless Joe Jackson go up against Pitch-O-Mat 5000 is always an instant classic.
 
2013-08-15 04:52:17 PM

IAmRight: How about you get three challenges/free baserunners/free outs (maximum 1 per inning on baserunners)?

If you don't use your challenges, you get to put a guy on base to start the inning. Or, on defense, you can use it as a free out to start the inning. Neither affects player stats, but the batter would have to either go to first base or be out.

/all you "what about the strategy?" whiners should love this


Because literally every manager would use it as free outs.  That is wildly overpowered.
 
2013-08-15 04:53:17 PM
Has anyone mentioned how much they will miss the cursing, hat throwing, and dirt kicking manager?  Because I will.
 
2013-08-15 04:57:49 PM

DeWayne Mann: They haven't had a wRC+ greater than ZERO since 1982. That doesn't really mean anything, it's just sort of insane.


The thing is that nowadays the DH is institutionalized from High School on.  So the pitchers don't get any BP in HS, college or at any of the minor league levels. Most don't even know how to bunt.  There have been a few decent hitting pitchers but they mostly faded out in the late 80s-early 90s.  Even though I would prefer no DH's in either league, I know it wouldn't be anything more than a pipe dream at this point.  So I would accept DHs in both leagues as a consolation.

/If the DH existed in the 1910s, Babe Ruth might have been nothing more than an above average pitcher.
 
2013-08-15 05:02:25 PM
Is there a punishment for getting a challange incorrect?  I have no major problem with the limit number of challanges since you don't lose the challange if you are correct.  They do need to implement a punishment system to make sure people only challange what is essential and extremely close and not just every other play that looks kinda close.  Since BB has no timeouts it should be a walk/out punishment.  If the Offensive calls a challange at a base and is incorrect then an extra out is added along with the player who was out.  If the defense calls a challange and is incorrect then the batter auto advances to the next base (obviously moving along any players in his way just like a 4 ball walk, only instead starting at the base that the challange was at instead of at home plate).  System isn't perfect but just my 2 cents.
 
2013-08-15 05:12:40 PM

Gunny Highway: Has anyone mentioned how much they will miss the cursing, hat throwing, and dirt kicking manager?  Because I will.


I'm all for instant replay, but yeah... I'm with you here.
 
2013-08-15 05:16:30 PM
I'm confused as to why you guys don't like this. The time allotted for a review is shorter than the time managers spend arguing, you retain the right to challenge if you're right, you can't just use it if you don't like it, sending it to New York means angel Hernandez can't refuse to change his call. Wtf is wrong?
 
2013-08-15 05:17:53 PM
Also 89% of incorrect calls can be fixed by the new system. Pretty farking good if you ask me.
 
2013-08-15 05:18:06 PM

thecpt: I'm confused as to why you guys don't like this. The time allotted for a review is shorter than the time managers spend arguing, you retain the right to challenge if you're right, you can't just use it if you don't like it, sending it to New York means angel Hernandez can't refuse to change his call. Wtf is wrong?


Why are we depending on managers to make sure the calls get right?
 
2013-08-15 05:21:57 PM

thecpt: Also 89% of incorrect calls can be fixed by the new system. Pretty farking good if you ask me.


Unless two of those calls happen in the first 6 innings and go against the same team. In which case, 50%.
 
2013-08-15 05:22:39 PM

thecpt: I'm confused as to why you guys don't like this. The time allotted for a review is shorter than the time managers spend arguing, you retain the right to challenge if you're right, you can't just use it if you don't like it, sending it to New York means angel Hernandez can't refuse to change his call. Wtf is wrong?


It is a half assed effort that will likely lock MLB is what many of us view is the wrong course.

We don't want a challenge system. We want a 5th umpire system (be that umpire be in New York or the stadium) who can review every play in real time.
 
2013-08-15 05:25:04 PM
Why not just one ump then?
 
2013-08-15 05:27:18 PM
Baseball needs replay.

Watching pitchers bat is the ultimate in boredom.  You can pretend like there is all kinds of strategery involved if you want I guess.
 
2013-08-15 05:28:40 PM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: I'm confused as to why you guys don't like this. The time allotted for a review is shorter than the time managers spend arguing, you retain the right to challenge if you're right, you can't just use it if you don't like it, sending it to New York means angel Hernandez can't refuse to change his call. Wtf is wrong?

Why are we depending on managers to make sure the calls get right?


We're depending on them to challenge plays properly. I suspect baseball fans who are also bear fans before this year won't like this system. I'm okay with it.
 
2013-08-15 05:32:36 PM

thecpt: DeWayne Mann: thecpt: I'm confused as to why you guys don't like this. The time allotted for a review is shorter than the time managers spend arguing, you retain the right to challenge if you're right, you can't just use it if you don't like it, sending it to New York means angel Hernandez can't refuse to change his call. Wtf is wrong?

Why are we depending on managers to make sure the calls get right?

We're depending on them to challenge plays properly. I suspect baseball fans who are also bear fans before this year won't like this system. I'm okay with it.


At some point, the following question will be asked in a press conference of a manager:

"Why didn't you challenge that call in the first? It ended up being the difference in the game."

And from that point on, the umps are 100% off the hook for bad calls.
 
2013-08-15 05:34:18 PM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: Also 89% of incorrect calls can be fixed by the new system. Pretty farking good if you ask me.

Unless two of those calls happen in the first 6 innings and go against the same team. In which case, 50%.


Random stat I heard during the angels-Yankees I was watching. It was mike Kay so it's probably painfully wrong and he gave it a horrible nickname like "the explosive challenger." As long as the manager is right it sounded like he/or she gets infinite challenges.

Women in baseball would make me lol. It would cause epic butthurt and I can confidently say they'd do a better job than Ozzie.
 
2013-08-15 05:35:51 PM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: DeWayne Mann: thecpt: I'm confused as to why you guys don't like this. The time allotted for a review is shorter than the time managers spend arguing, you retain the right to challenge if you're right, you can't just use it if you don't like it, sending it to New York means angel Hernandez can't refuse to change his call. Wtf is wrong?

Why are we depending on managers to make sure the calls get right?

We're depending on them to challenge plays properly. I suspect baseball fans who are also bear fans before this year won't like this system. I'm okay with it.

At some point, the following question will be asked in a press conference of a manager:

"Why didn't you challenge that call in the first? It ended up being the difference in the game."

And from that point on, the umps are 100% off the hook for bad calls.


Why is that bad? Wouldn't it take their ego out of it?
 
2013-08-15 05:40:45 PM

thecpt: Why is that bad?


I'd like to see the correct call made as much as possible. If managers have to use their challenges "strategically", THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN.

Seriously, this is a pretty big point, so I need to make sure: does the previous paragraph not make sense to you?

thecpt: Wouldn't it take their ego out of it?


You think letting umps get away with anything would take their ego OUT of it? Uhhhh
 
2013-08-15 05:44:55 PM
It definitely makes more sense to go back to the awesome theory of "alternating years" rather than making teams theoretically give a shiat about the All Star Game.  Then we can biatch and moan about how nobody cares about the All Star Game like every other sport.  Sounds much better.
 
2013-08-15 05:45:21 PM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: Also 89% of incorrect calls can be fixed by the new system. Pretty farking good if you ask me.

Unless two of those calls happen in the first 6 innings and go against the same team. In which case, 50%.


FTA
Challenges not used in the first six innings will not carry over, and a manager who wins a challenge will retain it.

So I guess this is better than the NFL system, where you have to win both challenges to get a third? If you keep challenging here and winning, you don't lose the challenge? Also the home run replay rules in effect now stay in place, so I'm guessing the managers can't challenge home runs (much like the NFL with any scoring play)
 
2013-08-15 05:48:23 PM

tenton: So I guess this is better than the NFL system, where you have to win both challenges to get a third? If you keep challenging here and winning, you don't lose the challenge?


Works great if we assume that managers will only challenge when they're 100% going to win.

Except wait....then they won't challenge on plays where they're only 75% likely to win. Uh oh.
 
2013-08-15 05:48:47 PM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: Why is that bad?

I'd like to see the correct call made as much as possible. If managers have to use their challenges "strategically", THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN.

Seriously, this is a pretty big point, so I need to make sure: does the previous paragraph not make sense to you?

thecpt: Wouldn't it take their ego out of it?

You think letting umps get away with anything would take their ego OUT of it? Uhhhh


Legit points. I just like football's model and I think this is a pretty good duplication. I don't think they should have multiple challenges they can use because they would use it all the time. Now they can only use it if they have a legitimate beef. If they are wrong, then sit down and shut up til the seventh when you get more. (They won't but they already biatch anyways)

Do I think this is perfect? Hell naw. But it's a great attempt, it will be successful, and if it can be improved then the owners will get it straight.
 
2013-08-15 05:52:25 PM

thecpt: I don't think they should have multiple challenges they can use because they would use it all the time.


They're still going to use it all the time. Most managers would be dumb to not use all three challenges every game.

thecpt: Now they can only use it if they have a legitimate beef. If they are wrong, then sit down and shut up til the seventh when you get more


And you don't think there's any problem here?

BAD CALLS SHOULD BE FIXED.

thecpt: if it can be improved then the owners will get it straight.


hahahahahahahahahahaha
 
2013-08-15 05:52:27 PM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: Why is that bad?

I'd like to see the correct call made as much as possible. If managers have to use their challenges "strategically", THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN.

Seriously, this is a pretty big point, so I need to make sure: does the previous paragraph not make sense to you?


That's a good point, but realistically, we're not getting full review of every play. At least with this, we might get a few bad calls overturned. That's better than what we have now
 
2013-08-15 05:55:29 PM

Rex_Banner: we're not getting full review of every play.


How would a 5th umpire system not result in reviewing every play?

Unless you mean "some plays will be considered unreviewable" in which case that's not going to be fixed no matter what so who cares?

Rex_Banner: That's better than what we have now


I'll just repeat what I already said:

DeWayne Mann: Frankly, I'd rather have 1 more season of no replay at all followed by a 5th umpire system than 2 years of this, two more years of "ok, you get challenges back if you win", 3 years of "get 1 new replay after every third extra inning" etc etc.


(note that that was before the "keep challenges if you win" thing was confirmed)
 
2013-08-15 06:31:12 PM
Why would a fifth umpire magically fix things?

What system do you want?
 
2013-08-15 06:31:14 PM
This will likely go the way of NFL replay. Over time, more reviews will be automatic, so managers will have to be less strategic about challanging. There will be growing pains, though. And Angel Hernandez will find a way to sabatoge the whole system.
 
2013-08-15 06:37:17 PM

thecpt: Why would a fifth umpire magically fix things?

What system do you want?


Every play would be reviewed if necessary. Every review would be done incredibly quickly. The umps won't feel like some guy is New York is showing them up. The burden would be on the umps to get the call right (not the managers), but they'd also be given the tools TO get the call right.

You'd still have a problem with guys like Angel Hernandez just being massive jerks, but that's a problem in any system (and one that absolutely needs to be fixed in any system, including this challenge idea).
 
2013-08-15 06:53:44 PM
I love this idea. It acknowledges that umps make mistakes, and adds a little bit of strategy to when the manager will complain about a call. He wont come out and argue something "close" anymore, the ump will just ask "Want to use a challenge? No? Sit down"

Most challenges will be legit. Im sure there will be the occasional "issue a challenge on that walk off HR that cleared the fence by 30 feet" by the visiting managers just to tick off the celebrating home fans, but by and large I think I think it will work ok. The NHL uses the system and it works most of the time, and frankly, extremely close plays with multiple-angle replays in super-slow motion can actually be entertaining. Hockey is a much faster sport, but I think it would translate to baseball too.

I mean, imagine the facial contortions someone like Hunter Pence as he dives to try and catch a ball, in super slow mo.
 
2013-08-15 06:57:01 PM

thecpt: Why would a fifth umpire magically fix things?

What system do you want?


Review every play instead of just ones that get "challenged".  Current TV coverage already has the ability to show replays for pretty much every single at-bat without interfering with the next one, so why not have an extra official watch these replays to see if there's any need for more scrutiny.  Because a vast majority of plays in baseball have a clear outcome (or are a walk/strikeout and would therefore not be reviewable due to "balls & strikes"), reviewing every play doesn't significantly affect the current flow of the game and has the potential to reverse the most glaring poor decisions.

Having a manager request a limited number of challenges may or may not affect the current flow of the game (eventually there will be an accepted way managers handle this, but as others have pointed out, this could also be another delay for relievers to warm up, etc, so we just don't know how this will affect game times--in all liklihood, though, it won't have much of an impact on game speeds).  However, using manager challenges doesn't necessarily allow for bad calls to be corrected to the greatest extent practical...which is what replay is supposed to accomplish in the first place.  Frankly, it's not that manager's challenges is a horrible system, but it's needlessly flawed without a corresponding benefit over other options.

/yes, I know DeWayne Mann already said basically the same thing, but I decided to say it again anyway with many, many more words
 
2013-08-15 07:03:39 PM
Baseball will continue to suck until the automate the calling of balls and strikes.  Every time I try and watch, I usually turn it off after the first blown ball/strike call.  I don't normally last two innings.
 
2013-08-15 07:04:54 PM

DeWayne Mann: Rex_Banner: we're not getting full review of every play.

How would a 5th umpire system not result in reviewing every play?

Unless you mean "some plays will be considered unreviewable" in which case that's not going to be fixed no matter what so who cares?

Rex_Banner: That's better than what we have now

I'll just repeat what I already said:

DeWayne Mann: Frankly, I'd rather have 1 more season of no replay at all followed by a 5th umpire system than 2 years of this, two more years of "ok, you get challenges back if you win", 3 years of "get 1 new replay after every third extra inning" etc etc.

(note that that was before the "keep challenges if you win" thing was confirmed)


I mean, yes, the 5th umpire system is better, maybe even ideal. I'm just willing to take baby steps like this. This isn't the best system, not by a ling shot. But it's SOMETHING, and I'll take that
 
2013-08-15 07:08:43 PM

ISO15693: It acknowledges that umps make mistakes


Not really. It acknowledges that bad calls happen, but we already know that.

ISO15693: adds a little bit of strategy to when the manager will complain about a call.


And why is this something we need? Keep in mind, you think that this acknowledges that umps make mistakes.

ISO15693: The NHL uses the system


No they don't.

TheMatchHare: /yes, I know DeWayne Mann already said basically the same thing, but I decided to say it again anyway with many, many more words


And I'm glad you did.
 
2013-08-15 07:09:54 PM

Rex_Banner: I'm just willing to take baby steps like this.


I'm gonna be overly dramatic here, just because I find it funny:

Baby steps towards a cliff aren't good.
 
2013-08-15 07:20:58 PM
As long ad angel gets fired too I'm happy
/wanted replay for YEARS
 
2013-08-15 07:22:54 PM
Also I hope they get hawkeye for balls and strikes.
 
2013-08-15 07:36:04 PM
Want to speed up the game? Eliminate batting gloves.
 
2013-08-15 07:48:41 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Peter von Nostrand: Next putdrop the DH in the Nationalfrom the American League as well


The National League is almost unique in all of baseball to make people sit through watching pitchers hit.  Only Japan's Central League clings with them to that anachronism.  Every other professional league in the world, college leagues, high school leagues, etc., all have abandoned it.

I'm kind of surprised that the NL allows their players to use mitts.
 
2013-08-15 08:08:07 PM

softshoes: Want to speed up the game? Eliminate batting gloves.


It's a good idea, but I wouldn't ban them, I'd just ban adjustable ones.  Make every play wear elastic wristbands on their gloves.
 
2013-08-15 08:28:31 PM

DeWayne Mann: Baby steps towards a cliff aren't good.


First thing that popped into my head:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkzWyOaS8kU
 
2013-08-15 09:10:20 PM

tricycleracer: ariseatex: Because baseball isn't slow enough.

MLB and NFL games average about the same duration.


There was a breakdown of game length by team a few years ago.  And shock of shocks - Yankees and Red Sox games took ten minutes longer than other teams' games.  Because they were on national television most often, which meant more TV dead time.

Not that there are other places where time can be shaved (the time between pitches needs to be cut, but how do you enforce that?), but TV is the biggest problem with games taking too long.  I really wish there were an FCC regulation prohibiting TV networks from coming back from commercial to spend 15 seconds saying "This game is brought to you by all those companies whose damn ads you just sat through".

The All-Powerful Atheismo: And it doesn't have enough tits and splosions.


What in life ever has enough nice-looking tits?
 
2013-08-15 11:36:56 PM
To those basically saying it will ruin the game, it's called progress. Get over it. Times are changing and technology is improving.

Or I suppose they could go back to only day games in the east where players can travel by train. Get rid of those damn helmets too. They're just allowing players to crowd the plate and make it harder on the pitcher.

Might as well ban black players while they're at it. Get back to the way baseball was meant to be played by god!
 
2013-08-15 11:40:40 PM

mybulkaddress: To those basically saying it will ruin the game, it's called progress. Get over it. Times are changing and technology is improving.


You may not have noticed, but most of the complaints in this thread are that they aren't going far enough.
 
2013-08-15 11:44:49 PM

dywed88: mybulkaddress: To those basically saying it will ruin the game, it's called progress. Get over it. Times are changing and technology is improving.

You may not have noticed, but most of the complaints in this thread are that they aren't going far enough.


Look, he had a strawman that needed fighting. He had no time for facts!
 
2013-08-15 11:54:20 PM

desertgeek: If that doesn't work, managers could be allowed 1 or 2 such "arguments" per game and any other time he comes out, he has to make a substitution. If that happens while on offense, the next batter has to be pinch hit for (it doesn't matter who that batter is).


Now THAT is a rational, baseball-style penalty for losing a challenge. However, I would just keep it offense OR defense, the next batter must be pinch-hit for (the start of the next inning if the team is currently on defense). That might make a manager more likely to challenge if his pitcher's spot is up the 7th inning or later, or less likely in the earlier innings when he can't afford to take out his pitcher. That adds strategy and a manager will have to be damn sure he is right. It hurts, but it's not such a penalty that it's going to cost a decent team the game.
 
2013-08-16 12:01:15 AM
Maybe then they could save infield fly calls for balls actually, you know, in the infield or when the call is obviously wrong.
 
2013-08-16 12:17:15 AM

steamingpile: Maybe then they could save infield fly calls for balls actually, you know, in the infield or when the call is obviously wrong.


Thank you fellow Braves fan.

Unfortunately, the infield fly rule, once invoked, would not be subject to replay.
 
2013-08-16 05:39:36 AM
Is there a definitive list of what can/can't be challenged? How about "on-field" fair/foul balls (I know that potential HRs are currently reviewed if necessary)?

My problem with reviewing and changing on field decisions is what do you do with baserunners who may have been able to advance but did not due to a wrong (and subsequently challenged and overturned) call? Example: bases loaded, batter hits a sharp drive down into the corner which bounces close to the LF line. The ump immediately calls it foul. The manager of the batting team challenges the decision and on replay the ball is deemed fair. What happens to the batter/runners? With a speedy guy on 1st, this could have been a 3-run play. Even a 2-base award penalises the batting team by taking away the opportunity to score that 3rd run. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples where overturned decisions would present problems with baserunner placement.
 
2013-08-16 06:52:20 AM

Soup_In_A_Basket: Is there a definitive list of what can/can't be challenged? How about "on-field" fair/foul balls (I know that potential HRs are currently reviewed if necessary)?

My problem with reviewing and changing on field decisions is what do you do with baserunners who may have been able to advance but did not due to a wrong (and subsequently challenged and overturned) call? Example: bases loaded, batter hits a sharp drive down into the corner which bounces close to the LF line. The ump immediately calls it foul. The manager of the batting team challenges the decision and on replay the ball is deemed fair. What happens to the batter/runners? With a speedy guy on 1st, this could have been a 3-run play. Even a 2-base award penalises the batting team by taking away the opportunity to score that 3rd run. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples where overturned decisions would present problems with baserunner placement.


How do you feel about ground rule doubles and its rules?
 
2013-08-16 06:59:25 AM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: Why would a fifth umpire magically fix things?

What system do you want?

Every play would be reviewed if necessary. Every review would be done incredibly quickly. The umps won't feel like some guy is New York is showing them up. The burden would be on the umps to get the call right (not the managers), but they'd also be given the tools TO get the call right.

You'd still have a problem with guys like Angel Hernandez just being massive jerks, but that's a problem in any system (and one that absolutely needs to be fixed in any system, including this challenge idea).


That's assuming it could be done quickly and accurately though. From the nfl, I know sometimes someone has too look at a gray area play for 3 minutes to get it straight. Baseball is normally a simpler sport so that will be far less common, but pausing play often for something iffy could be detrimental. If they prove they can do it that quickly then I'm on your side (not going to argue "added strategy" bs). I just don't think they will be able to in practice.

Maybe I just have less faith in umps than I should, and more in the owners' ability to amend the rules. Yes, I know what you're going to say to this.
 
2013-08-16 07:49:50 AM

ox45tallboy: steamingpile: Maybe then they could save infield fly calls for balls actually, you know, in the infield or when the call is obviously wrong.

Thank you fellow Braves fan.

Unfortunately, the infield fly rule, once invoked, would not be subject to replay.


Then its a moot point since the biggest blown call involved an umpire that had no clue what the rule means.
 
2013-08-16 08:43:14 AM
Mangers will be able to use it to give their reliever some extra time too.  Wait for it - top of the 9th, 2 on/1 out.  Manager challenges a foul ball - 4 min, then a mound visit - another 3 minutes, then a pitching change - another 3 minutes.  You just wasted 10-12 minutes.
there's better ways of doing this, having a 5th ump at the game is definitely one of them.
 
2013-08-16 08:45:04 AM

thecpt: Soup_In_A_Basket: Is there a definitive list of what can/can't be challenged? How about "on-field" fair/foul balls (I know that potential HRs are currently reviewed if necessary)?

My problem with reviewing and changing on field decisions is what do you do with baserunners who may have been able to advance but did not due to a wrong (and subsequently challenged and overturned) call? Example: bases loaded, batter hits a sharp drive down into the corner which bounces close to the LF line. The ump immediately calls it foul. The manager of the batting team challenges the decision and on replay the ball is deemed fair. What happens to the batter/runners? With a speedy guy on 1st, this could have been a 3-run play. Even a 2-base award penalises the batting team by taking away the opportunity to score that 3rd run. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples where overturned decisions would present problems with baserunner placement.

How do you feel about ground rule doubles and its rules?


But we're not talking about a ground rule double here. We're talking about an in-play fair ball which is wrongly called foul then overturned on appeal. Sure, MLB could rule that in this circumstance a runner gets 2nd and all other move up 2, but the hitting team are still penalised through losing the potential opportunity to score a 3rd run on the play. Also, from a defensive standpoint there might be an argument that the positioning of the fielder may have been such that a play at 2nd (or elsewhere) might have been possible.

All I'm trying to illustrate here is that resetting the field after an overturned decisions may not be as straightforward as many who are in favor of replay may think. From what I'm reading, balls/strikes and plays at bases (forces/tags) will not be subject to review. Does anyone know if fair/foul would be considered (if not, it makes my illustration above moot)? How about things like leaving a bag too early when tagging up? Running outside the baseline? Trapping or otherwise dropping a catch?

Until we see a full list of whats reviewable and what the precise outcomes of an overturned review would be, its hard to say whether I like this or not (for the moment, I'll go with not!)
 
2013-08-16 08:51:57 AM
Funny that we complain about the poor quality of umpires but the prevailing opinion in this thread is that we need more of them.
 
2013-08-16 09:24:58 AM

thecpt: That's assuming it could be done quickly and accurately though. From the nfl, I know sometimes someone has too look at a gray area play for 3 minutes to get it straight. Baseball is normally a simpler sport so that will be far less common, but pausing play often for something iffy could be detrimental. If they prove they can do it that quickly then I'm on your side (not going to argue "added strategy" bs). I just don't think they will be able to in practice.


I don't understand the objection. Isn't that going to be a problem in any system?

thecpt: Maybe I just have less faith in umps than I should, and more in the owners' ability to amend the rules. Yes, I know what you're going to say to this.


I think most umps want to get things right. Not all, but most.

I think ALL owners want to make the game as profitable as possible. Since I see no difference in profit between the two systems (and, depending on how it's implemented, I can see how the 5th umpire would cost them money), I don't understand why they would bother.

steamingpile: Then its a moot point since the biggest blown call involved an umpire that had no clue what the rule means.


For the 800th time, you are the one who doesn't know what the infield fly rule means.
 
2013-08-16 09:41:29 AM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: That's assuming it could be done quickly and accurately though. From the nfl, I know sometimes someone has too look at a gray area play for 3 minutes to get it straight. Baseball is normally a simpler sport so that will be far less common, but pausing play often for something iffy could be detrimental. If they prove they can do it that quickly then I'm on your side (not going to argue "added strategy" bs). I just don't think they will be able to in practice.

I don't understand the objection. Isn't that going to be a problem in any system?

thecpt: Maybe I just have less faith in umps than I should, and more in the owners' ability to amend the rules. Yes, I know what you're going to say to this.

I think most umps want to get things right. Not all, but most.

I think ALL owners want to make the game as profitable as possible. Since I see no difference in profit between the two systems (and, depending on how it's implemented, I can see how the 5th umpire would cost them money), I don't understand why they would bother.

steamingpile: Then its a moot point since the biggest blown call involved an umpire that had no clue what the rule means.

For the 800th time, you are the one who doesn't know what the infield fly rule means.


The objection is I assumed you meant a review system that is constantly working outside of the game. (Might not have been what you meant, I'm on oxycodone right now so I might have interpreted what a purple dragon said instead of what you wrote in your post). That system would have to study out each play, even ones where managers aren't going to argue. Wouldn't they have to stop the game, every pitch, until their review is done?


Now back to making sense perhaps. I think owners understand that if they improve the quality and result of the game then they would retain and increase the fan base. I wish they would lower ticket prices cause I think they're on the opposite side of the laffer, but hey I've been wanting review since the nfl did it.
 
2013-08-16 09:45:15 AM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: I don't think they should have multiple challenges they can use because they would use it all the time.

They're still going to use it all the time. Most managers would be dumb to not use all three challenges every game.


And yet in tennis, you could say it would be dumb for players not to use all three challenges every set, yet they don't.  Very rarely you have a player waste a challenge to catch his breath after a long rally, but that's usually late in the set and when they haven't used one yet, so they don't have to worry about needing a challenge but not having any left.

Based on that, I could believe baseball would not abuse the system either.
 
2013-08-16 09:47:08 AM

thecpt: The objection is I assumed you meant a review system that is constantly working outside of the game. (Might not have been what you meant, I'm on oxycodone right now so I might have interpreted what a purple dragon said instead of what you wrote in your post). That system would have to study out each play, even ones where managers aren't going to argue. Wouldn't they have to stop the game, every pitch, until their review is done?


I'm talking about something akin to this:

desertgeek: The easiest way to do this was to just have a 5th umpire in the press box with a TV monitor who could review plays before the next batter and if he needed more time to review a play, he could request that play be held up while he does that


Next time you watch a game on TV, pay attention to how often they cut away from actual game action to look at a possible bad call. It's not much; usually they just cut away from managers arguing or batters going through their pre at bat ritual.

That's roughly how often this system would slow down play.

thecpt: I think owners understand that if they improve the quality and result of the game then they would retain and increase the fan base.


Do you think the casual fan cares about the distinction? Shoot, they might even like the challenges more because it's exciting and strategeric.
 
2013-08-16 09:52:28 AM

idesofmarch: And yet in tennis, you could say it would be dumb for players not to use all three challenges every set, yet they don't.


I know nothing at all about tennis, but ok.

idesofmarch: Based on that, I could believe baseball would not abuse the system either.


All I'm going to say is that there would be sound tactical reasons to not let any challenge go to waste, without any real downside. Managers do sub-optimal things all the time, so it's possible they would here too. But a smart manager would not.

Now, maybe there will be a penalty of some sort for a frivolous challenge, which would change the equation. But that would open up a whole other set of issues.
 
2013-08-16 10:00:30 AM

DeWayne Mann: idesofmarch: And yet in tennis, you could say it would be dumb for players not to use all three challenges every set, yet they don't.

I know nothing at all about tennis, but ok.

idesofmarch: Based on that, I could believe baseball would not abuse the system either.

All I'm going to say is that there would be sound tactical reasons to not let any challenge go to waste, without any real downside. Managers do sub-optimal things all the time, so it's possible they would here too. But a smart manager would not.

Now, maybe there will be a penalty of some sort for a frivolous challenge, which would change the equation. But that would open up a whole other set of issues.


The US Open starts Mon., 8/26, on ESPN2 - you should consider watching some to see what I'm talking about.  The players really use them sparingly, because they don't want to be out of challenges for when they really need one - and I think that's the reason managers in baseball won't fritter them away for the sake of being "strategic."

Just imagine this scenario: a manager for a team down 4-1 in the bottom of the 8th calls a challenge on a fair/foul down the line that would mean a run scoring from second.  It wasn't very close, but he figures, eh, maybe we get that run in.  The call stands, and now he's out of challenges.  In the bottom of the 9th, the team rallies, and the tieing run is at third with one out.  The batter hits a fly to the outfield where it is caught - the runner goes from third and is called out at the plate - the game is over.  TV replays show the runner got his foot in before the tag.  If only the manager had a challenge left to use.

Imagine the flak he would get - so I think that's why managers won't (or shouldn't) squander them.
 
2013-08-16 10:05:28 AM
Just an addendum  to my post above. I was under the impression (for some reason....don't know why) that base calls wouldn't be reviewable, but lots of people are citing some notable bad calls at first as examples of things that would be "put right" by replay.

Does this mean that calls at ALL bases will be reviewable? Or just those at 1st?

MLB seem to be screwing this up already by not providing enough clear and concise info....or is it that they simply haven't figured it out themselves?
 
2013-08-16 10:09:10 AM
So the new rumor is that the umpires want to be able to challenge plays on their own if a manager is out of challenges. In which case....why are there challenges?

idesofmarch: and I think that's the reason managers in baseball won't fritter them away for the sake of being "strategic."


So, let's take a simple situation. It's the bottom of the 6th, 2 outs. The pitcher has suddenly lost his control and has walked 2 straight. Both teams are losing their challenge as soon as the next out is made. Why wouldn't the following happen (assuming everything I suggest is challengable is challengable):

Away team has the pitcher throw to first. Runner is called safe; away manager challenges. Meanwhile, a pitcher is warming in the pen. Challenge concludes, new pitcher is brought in. New pitcher gets set, home manager challenges that he balked. Now he gets to go several minutes without throwing a pitch.

Where's the downside for either challenge?

idesofmarch: Imagine the flak he would get


Oh hey, it's like what I said before:

DeWayne Mann: The idea of replay is SUPPOSED to be "Umpiring is hard. Let's do whatever we can to help them out and get the calls right."

This is "If an ump blows a call, which they probably will because we're not helping them at all, blame the manager for not getting it overturned."


That's one of my biggest issues with it: that the manager would get flak for running out of challenges.
 
2013-08-16 10:10:51 AM

Soup_In_A_Basket: Just an addendum  to my post above. I was under the impression (for some reason....don't know why) that base calls wouldn't be reviewable, but lots of people are citing some notable bad calls at first as examples of things that would be "put right" by replay.

Does this mean that calls at ALL bases will be reviewable? Or just those at 1st?

MLB seem to be screwing this up already by not providing enough clear and concise info....or is it that they simply haven't figured it out themselves?


They've yet to do the final approval. May be that's the problem. Also, I said this earlier but lovie smith is a fine example of reviewing done wrong.
 
2013-08-16 10:10:56 AM

Soup_In_A_Basket: Just an addendum  to my post above. I was under the impression (for some reason....don't know why) that base calls wouldn't be reviewable, but lots of people are citing some notable bad calls at first as examples of things that would be "put right" by replay.

Does this mean that calls at ALL bases will be reviewable? Or just those at 1st?

MLB seem to be screwing this up already by not providing enough clear and concise info....or is it that they simply haven't figured it out themselves?


MLB is being incredibly vague, as usual, but it sounds like the only things you can't challenge involve the batter at the plate: ball/strike, hit by pitch, did he swing, etc. Additionally, you can't challenge HRs, but that's because the umpires will handle those.
 
2013-08-16 10:24:58 AM

DeWayne Mann: So the new rumor is that the umpires want to be able to challenge plays on their own if a manager is out of challenges. In which case....why are there challenges?


Oh, well that's an easy one - because of guys like Angel Hernandez.

If the goal of replay is to get the calls right, then the challenge system isn't perfect - it does put an onus on the manager, and if he runs out of challenges, then for the time being it's as if replay doesn't exist anymore.  So I guess when an ump makes a blatantly bad call and the other umps saw it differently, they want to put in their two cents and get it fixed.

DeWayne Mann: Where's the downside for either challenge?


Yeah, I'm not super in love with the whole 1 challenge before the 6th, one after - or whatever it is - since it does encourage the use-it-or-lose-it mentality.  I think it should be a certain number for every 9 innings played.  Maybe 2, with the manager keeping a challenge if he is correct.  Add a challenge at the beginning of the 10th, 13th, 16th etc.   (Very similar to tennis.)
This way, if the manager ran out of challenges because he wasted them, it was his fault and he deserves the flak he gets.
 
2013-08-16 10:25:39 AM
This will be a mess... and the rules governing challenges will take up dozens of pages.

Football starts and stops in 3-10 second intervals. Play stops... don't like the call... throw the red flag.

Baseball doesn't work that way. An entire half inning can be completed without play ever stopping (the ball being dead).

It's gonna be a mess.
 
2013-08-16 10:53:04 AM

DeWayne Mann: MLB is being incredibly vague, as usual, but it sounds like the only things you can't challenge involve the batter at the plate: ball/strike, hit by pitch, did he swing, etc. Additionally, you can't challenge HRs, but that's because the umpires will handle those.


Which is extra-stupid, because this is one of the areas where they could implement technology that would vastly outperform human umps, and do it completely invisibly (home plate umpire earpiece tied to PitchFx) with zero delay to the game.  PitchFx is already in every stadium broadcasting in real time to the Internet, so a couple of IT guys could rig this up tomorrow after a trip to Radio Shack.
 
2013-08-16 10:54:07 AM

DeWayne Mann: So the new rumor is that the umpires want to be able to challenge plays on their own if a manager is out of challenges. In which case....why are there challenges?


http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2013/08/15/mlb-instant-repl ay -manager-challenges-on-hold/2659555/

According to this, "If a manager exhausts his three challenges, and umpire crew can make a review of its own only to determine home-run calls, a rule that will be grandfathered in with the new regulations."
 
2013-08-16 10:57:15 AM

idesofmarch: DeWayne Mann: So the new rumor is that the umpires want to be able to challenge plays on their own if a manager is out of challenges. In which case....why are there challenges?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2013/08/15/mlb-instant-repl ay -manager-challenges-on-hold/2659555/

According to this, "If a manager exhausts his three challenges, and umpire crew can make a review of its own only to determine home-run calls, a rule that will be grandfathered in with the new regulations."


http://sports.yahoo.com/news/instant-replay-proposal-is-small-step-i n- right-direction-for-mlb-041246465.html

And one source at the World Umpires Association said they plan to ask for - and expect to be granted - what amounts to a doomsday trigger: If a manager is out of challenges and an imperative call is close, they can request a replay themselves.

Remember, the umps haven't voted on this plan yet.
 
2013-08-16 11:03:40 AM

DeWayne Mann: Additionally, you can't challenge HRs, but that's because the umpires will handle those.


I'm waiting for a situation where a manager challenges a HR call, and the umpires take it away from him because he didn't have the right to challenge it, like what happened to the Detroit Lions last season. Yes I'm kidding, but MLB's implementation of replay is going to be a fiasco. I just want them to get the calls right. The powers that be are using a baseball bat to knock a fly off the baby's nose.
 
2013-08-16 11:06:28 AM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: I just want them to get the calls right.


But where's the strategy in that? Isn't that what's really important?
 
2013-08-16 11:22:18 AM

DeWayne Mann: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: I just want them to get the calls right.

But where's the strategy in that? Isn't that what's really important?


Oh, I don't mind if my team steals a call now and again, but I demand the rest of the calls be fair. But then again, I'm an AL fan. What would I know about strategy?
 
2013-08-16 11:25:29 AM
UNAUTHORIZED FINGER:  Yes I'm kidding, but MLB's implementation of replay is going to be a fiasco.

I'm looking forward to seeing pitchers run for the mound to be able to get a foot on the rubber after there's a close play called in their favor... kinda like they do in football
 
2013-08-16 11:35:44 AM

Pray 4 Mojo: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER:  Yes I'm kidding, but MLB's implementation of replay is going to be a fiasco.

I'm looking forward to seeing pitchers run for the mound to be able to get a foot on the rubber after there's a close play called in their favor... kinda like they do in football


Baseball's hurry-up defense!
 
2013-08-16 09:44:46 PM
I just had a new thought: I wonder if MLB instituted instant replay for next year in anticipation of shiatty officiating in the playoffs this year, just like every year.  This way when calls are blown MLB can say, "Look, we know, OK?  Next year will be better."
 
2013-08-17 01:16:43 AM

DeWayne Mann: thecpt: That's assuming it could be done quickly and accurately though. From the nfl, I know sometimes someone has too look at a gray area play for 3 minutes to get it straight. Baseball is normally a simpler sport so that will be far less common, but pausing play often for something iffy could be detrimental. If they prove they can do it that quickly then I'm on your side (not going to argue "added strategy" bs). I just don't think they will be able to in practice.

I don't understand the objection. Isn't that going to be a problem in any system?

thecpt: Maybe I just have less faith in umps than I should, and more in the owners' ability to amend the rules. Yes, I know what you're going to say to this.

I think most umps want to get things right. Not all, but most.

I think ALL owners want to make the game as profitable as possible. Since I see no difference in profit between the two systems (and, depending on how it's implemented, I can see how the 5th umpire would cost them money), I don't understand why they would bother.

steamingpile: Then its a moot point since the biggest blown call involved an umpire that had no clue what the rule means.

For the 800th time, you are the one who doesn't know what the infield fly rule means.


No I do, that's how I know he was 100% wrong, not only was it not on the infield, the player was not camped under the ball and the out was not assured. All 3 must be in play to make that call, 2 of 3 were not even close and you could barely see the infield from where the ball dropped so I can see where he could make that mistake

The reason why you are wrong is that everyone else in baseball disagrees with you thats not in St Louis, hell it wasn't even his call, the ump who should have made the call, if it needed to be called stood there waiting for the play to be made. In other words you're wrong, fark off.
 
2013-08-17 01:21:44 AM
Oh god, there is no need to argue baseball with you, anyone that thinks war is a top stat knows nothing about baseball. Sabermetrics is crap to build a team around, its a starting point but it will only get you so far like the A's did, they won't win the WS.
 
Displayed 212 of 212 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report