The Opponents

There are two primary arguments against replay. One is that it would take the human element out of the game and opponents say that baseball games take too long now and instant replay would only extend the length of a ball game.  I think these arguments are not only wrong, but ridiculous.

One of the great things about baseball that separates it from the other three major sports is that there is no clock. So my question is how long is too long? I’m not suggesting that there aren’t things that can be done to speed up the game. Instant replay, implemented corrected would help speed up the game.

Baseball traditionalists will argue that this is how the game has always been played, the “This is the way it’s always been done” argument. The most damaging phrase in the English language is: ‘It’s always been done that way.’ - Grace Murray Hopper

Just because something has always been done a certain way, that’s no reason to keep doing it the same way, unless of course the method has no room for improvement. In baseball’s case there is plenty of room for improvement. Mistakes have been and will continue to be made on the field by umpires under the current process.  Humans are incapable of making correct calls with 100% accuracy, and until recently, we didn’t have the technology that would allow us to improve the accuracy of these calls.

Why should pitchers and hitters have to adjust to the “strike zone of the night”? Why do the “good” hitters and pitchers get the benefit of the doubt on calls? If you don’t think umpires favor the better pitchers then explain why Greg Maddux had a 1.63 Earned Run Average (ERA) in 11 starts where John Hirschbeck was behind the plate. Compare that to Maddux’s lifetime ERA of 3.16. Hirschbeck was warned by MLB in 2002, claiming that he had “a high percentage of missed calls of balls and strikes”.

I watch this “crap” every day. During a recent Yankees – Angeles game home plate umpire Chris Guccione called Derek Jeter out on strikes. Jeter who rarely argues had words with Guccione. Replay showed that the pitch was nowhere near the strike zone, the one where the ball is supposed cross some portion of the plate. This total disregard of the rules by the people (umpires) who are supposed to be enforcing them is reprehensible. But this is how Bud Selig and his narrow minded cronies think this is the way the game should continue to be played.

Baseball has already admitted that replay has value by using instant replay on home run calls. Why not add instant replay to the rest of the game?  Forget how the game was played for a hundred years before we had computers and all of the modern technology that gives us the capabilities to add accuracy to the game.

This isn’t 1911, it’s 2011 and we have the computer technology to call balls and strikes and for replay from multiple angles to avoid botched

calls.  Baseball has no valid reason to avoid this technology. Having the replay umpire manage game calls defeats the greatest argument or concern regarding the use of instant replay. The weakest argument with the least merit is that there always has been a human element in the officiating and there always should be.

Implementing today’s technology would change the role of the MLB umpire. Although it’s tempting, I’m not suggesting we eliminate umpires.  Balls and strikes can be instantly called by cameras, and with much better accuracy (within 1/2 inch). This would eliminate the personal interpretation of the strike zone by each umpire.  You obviously need someone making the calls on the field, but close plays can’t be judged with the proper accuracy by one person making a split second decision.

The Human Element

The idea that instant replay would impact the human element is one of the lamest arguments that there is. Humans will still play the game, coach the game and sit in the stands. And yes Virginia; human umpires will still monitor and manage a game, but with the help of modern technology to ensure there are no further disasters. This implication that the game will become robotic just because plays will be reviewed (by humans I might add) is stupid. The human element is part of the game. The problem is humans aren’t perfect, and are prone to errors.  However, it’s one thing for a team to make an error that might cost them the game.  It’s another thing for an umpire to make an error that costs a team a game.  The goal of umpiring is to oversee the game, and make sure the correct calls are made.  That doesn’t always happen as it should, and it’s because of the human element.  So basically, the only advantage to the human element is that it allows us to have more bad calls.

The solution is so simple, but most likely will never be implemented under the current regime. Longtime opponent MLB Commissioner Bud Selig said he would consider it. Selig acknowledged as much in his statement about not reversing Jim Joyce’s bad call. “While the human element has always been an integral part of baseball, it is vital that mistakes on the field be addressed,” Selig said. “Given last night’s call and other recent events, I will examine our umpiring system, the expanded use of instant replay and all other related features.”

The Jim Joyce/Galarraga call in 2010 was so bad I had false hope that is would finally spur MLB to take a serious look at expanding the use of instant replay. That was almost a year ago and nothing has changed.

I was further disillusioned when Joe Torre, MLB’s executive vice president for baseball operations, who is still not in favor of expanding replay dismissed calls for expanded replay in baseball. “Having been the beneficiary of calls like this and having been on the other end in my experience as a player and as a manager, I have felt that this has always been a part of our game” Torre said in his statement. “As a member of the Commissioner’s Special Committee for On-Field Matters, I have heard many discussions on umpiring and technology over the past two years, including both the pros and the cons of expanding replay. However, most in the game recognize that the human element always will be part of baseball and instant replay can never replace all judgment calls by umpires. Obviously, a play like this is going to spark a lot of conversation, and we will continue to consider all viewpoints in our ongoing discussions regarding officiating in baseball.” Translation – Umpires have always been blowing calls and there is no reason to change anything, because that’s the way we have always done it.

Here are some examples of how the human element impacts a game.

How many times have you seen a catcher, catch the pitch outside the strike zone, and then move his glove back into the strike zone where the call is made based on where the catcher’s glove is after the move. Apparently, umpires are blind and can’t see the catcher moving his glove.

Something that has bothered me for a long time and would hopefully be eliminated. A player isn’t allowed to do anything that would show-up an umpire. So why are umpires allowed to show-up players. I’m specifically referring to the way umpires make a third strike call. Some of these antics are ridiculous and demeaning to the player.

Not only are umpires missing calls, they have gotten lazy. For example, why is there a second base when it doesn’t matter whether the

second baseman or shortstop actually touch it when they have possession of the ball. As long as they are in the “neighborhood” that is good enough for the umpires. I actually saw a game where an umpire called a runner safe because the fielder didn’t touch second base while having possession of the ball. The TV announcers were incredulous; they couldn’t understand why he would make such a call.

Other than the umpires, who wouldn’t want the best judging possible, judging done by humans incorporating the best technology available to them instead of merely trusting their own reflexes and recall? The answer is the Commissioner’s office.

Why shouldn’t umpires have the same resources available to them that fans have? This would eliminate players and managers arguing with umpires over botched calls.

Bottom line: If the technology exists to dramatically enhance the umpiring of a baseball game, why isn’t baseball employing it?

The Time Element

Instant – an infinitesimal space of time. I believe that means fast.

The opponents who claim that instant replay slows down the game are either technology bigots or they are closed minded to the suggestion of change. Adding instant replay would not lengthen games, but instead it would in practice shorten them by eliminating the automatic arguing between the manager and umpire on questionable calls that will never be changed. How much time is wasted during an argument over a call? Depending on the manager, it could take minutes. Using instant replay to get the call right and eliminate the arguing would take seconds. The replay ump in the booth can call balls and strikes and reverse on-field calls in seconds, and he can do so with the best possibility for an accurate call.

During a recent Yankees/Red Sox game ESPN analyst Bobby Valentin pointed out that Boston starter Josh Beckett, among the most unhurried pitchers in baseball averages 40.3 seconds between pitches when there’s a runner on base, and 25 seconds with the bases empty (FanGraphs.com). Major League Baseball rules require a pitcher to take no more than 12 seconds between pitches when the bases are empty. I watch a lot of baseball and I’ve never seen the 12-second limit enforced and I probably never will.

During the sixth inning, Valentine said: “That’s a half-hour added to this game of him standing around and us sitting around watching him do nothing.”

There is no question that the length of baseball games has increased over the past 40 years. During the 1970s games averaged around  2:30. However, during the past decade the average game time increased to 2:52.

These are some of the reasons why the games are taking longer:

1. The use of situational relievers starting as early as the sixth inning

2. Cut down on the number of pitcher/catcher conferences

3. Stop batters from stepping out of the batters box, adjusting their gloves after every pitch

4. Enforce the time limit rule for pitchers

However, I think you have to enforce number 3 before you can expect a pitcher to pitch in 12 seconds.

Number one isn’t really a candidate for speeding up the game, its just the way the game is played. Numbers 2, 3, 4 are definite candidates for speeding up the game. Make these improvements along with implementing instant replay and watch the game times come down.