MLB '10 - Page 13

Ghoulish Delight · 06-03-2010, 09:05 AM

I'm of the opinion that MLB is ultra-resistant to replay because it seems inevitable that it would lead to opening ball and strike calls to replay. The idea of the ball and strike calls from the ump being unquestionable is sacrosanct in the game, and opening that to replay would be a pretty radical change in what the game is to a lot of people.

Alex · 06-03-2010, 09:19 AM

I'm ok with it since the error was so completely clear and the change has only statistical significance.

The winner is not changed. Nobody else is deprived of any meaningful achievement, etc. The net result officially is:

Picture allowed one less hit, appeared for one less plate appearance, and three (?) fewer pitches.

Batter achieved one less hit (which even he acknowledges was a mistake)

Following batter loses one plate appearance.

===

Now, what I find interesting is how we perceive the relative importance. If the blown call had been in the first inning but otherwise everything else was identical, how much outrage would there be? One-hitters happen all the time but we only seem to care about that hit when it come in the ninth inning.

I'm not a fan of replay in baseball but I'd be ok with a limited number of manager challenges for use in entirely unambiguous situations (that is, not only can you determine what the correct call should have been but you can say with certainty what the outcome of a correct call would have been; that second part is missing in most situations). Just to allow for the few times of extremely heightened importance to have recourse. I'd also be fine with umpires having discretion to ask for review help in unambiguous situations (though that might not have helped here since Joyce was absolutely certain of his call until he saw the replay).

But I think widespread use of replay would fundamentally change the experience of watching baseball and actually increase the number of incorrect initial calls. The impact of error for a call is frequently asymmetrical. That is, in a given situation Call A instead of B may be more ambiguous than B instead of A, so the pressure would be to call B and let replay settle it, regardless of whether A was more obviously correct.

Example:
Line drive right over the first base bag and it hooks into the outfield corner. Stand up double for the batter but the guy on first is thrown out at home plate.

Except umpire slipped a bit getting in position to make the fair/foul call and was a little bit late getting his eyes on it. He's 90% sure it just barely missed the chalk and was foul. But if he calls foul and is wrong, what do you do? You can't know that the batter wouldn't have tried for a triple, that the man on base would have been thrown out at home. You don't know that the batter wouldn't have slipped rounding first and have ended up with just a single.

So better to call fair, let the play happen and then go to the replay booth because resetting to the correct foul call is easy.

Ghoulish Delight · 06-03-2010, 09:22 AM

Regarding this specific case...I think I'm okay with it being overturned. The ump admitted afterwards he was wrong, the call was clearly and verifiably wrong, and overturning it would be a clean deal, not affecting any game outcomes or getting into any situation where you can't just assume everything afterwards would have happened the same if the right call had been made. Overturn the call, game ends then, the next at bat is wiped off the record, voila, balance restored.

But I'm pretty sure that overturning it will be basically an admission that yes, instant replay for calls beyond homerun calls will be coming to baseball.

Alex · 06-03-2010, 09:33 AM

I agree, it is inevitable. I'm just not sure I'll like the result (I'm a mixed traditionalist, I abhor interleague play but love the wild card and designated hitter).

I'd have no problem if remains used for only unambiguous (as defined by me above) situations but I doubt it would, because unambuous will be something that changes from moment to moment (a ball call on what would have been strike two is ambiguous, a ball call on what would have been strike three is not) and most of the time it is the ambiguous situations that are more significant and therefore the argument would be that it is more important that they be correct even if you can't correct them with certainty.

==

On Griffey retiring. I came to baseball late when I got to college and was given a sports obsessed roommate. I'd never even watched a game before then (and have still never actually played a game of baseball/softball in my life). Being introduced to the sport via the Seattle Mariners in 1992-1996 was a pretty good time to do it.

Ken Griffey Jr.
Randy Johnson
Alex Rodriguez
Edgar Martinez

3.5 Hall of Famers all on one overlooked team. Me leaving Seattle was about the same time that group imploded but I'm glad I got to see them. It was sad to see how quickly injuries overtook Griffey but also good to be reminded of the more natural arc of aging for baseball players.

Ghoulish Delight · 06-03-2010, 09:43 AM

It's weird to look at a guy who's #5 on the all time homer list and close to 3000 hits and think, "Man, so disappointing. I feel sorry for the guy." It really is astounding to ponder what he might have done had his body cooperated.

But kudos to him for being a class act through what must have been an epic amount of frustration.

Strangler Lewis · 06-03-2010, 09:53 AM

I don't see how a sport that still allows double plays to be turned by middle infielders in the vicinity of second base can introduce instant reply. Plus, as Alex has alluded to, unlike with football or tennis, there are things that can be happening with other base runners that can be affected by the blown call. It sounds like a big headache to puzzle out the situations in which it could be used from the situations in which it couldn't.

I would hate to see instant reply used on balls and strikes. Unlike with football or tennis, the authority of the umpire is a big part of the culture. However, if it turns out that balls and strikes can be challenged, the umpires have only themselves to blame with guys like Eric Gregg saying, "Hey, you know what my strike zone is."

Strangler Lewis · 06-03-2010, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

It's weird to look at a guy who's #5 on the all time homer list and close to 3000 hits and think, "Man, so disappointing. I feel sorry for the guy." It really is astounding to ponder what he might have done had his body cooperated.

But kudos to him for being a class act through what must have been an epic amount of frustration.

Kudos to him for (apparently) not juicing, but didn't he leave Seattle out of concern that the new ballpark would shrink his home run output?

Ghoulish Delight · 06-03-2010, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

I don't see how a sport that still allows double plays to be turned by middle infielders in the vicinity of second base can introduce instant reply. Plus, as Alex has alluded to, unlike with football or tennis, there are things that can be happening with other base runners that can be affected by the blown call. It sounds like a big headache to puzzle out the situations in which it could be used from the situations in which it couldn't.

I've always hated the lame excuse of, "it's for the safety of the fielder."

Regarding ambiguous post-replay-overturn situations, in some way baseball already has a mechanism for that built in. There are several situations (ball goes out of play or defensive interference are a couple examples) where awarding a runner a base advancement comes down to an umpire's judgment call as to how far the baserunner might have made it without the situation occurring.

e.g. with a runner on first going on the pitch, there's a ground ball fielded b the shortstop, whose throw to first sails into the stands. If that runner from first base had rounded 2nd and was heading toward third, it's the umpires' discretion whether to say he was at 2nd and award him 3rd on the overthrow, or that he would have reasonably gotten to third base even on a good throw, and therefore award him home.

So it's not THAT much of a stretch to allow for some ambiguity in instant replay instances. Though it still personally doesn't sit well with me. Currently those situations are uncommon and as such people accept them as necessary edge cases that add to the idiosyncratic charm of baseball. If replay increases the frequency too much, the charm disappears.

Alex · 06-03-2010, 10:16 AM

Maybe that was part of it, but there was no statistical evidence of it. He hit about half his home runs in 1999 in Safeco Field.

But it wasn't like he left for the Yankees or something, he specifically wanted to go to Cincinnati where he'd grown up and deep roots with the team (it was where he grew up and his father played there through most of the '70s).

Griffey's version is that a) he wanted to be closer to his family, but also that b) the management of the team came to him and said "we can keep you or A-Rod, who should it be?" His view was that if it they weren't sure they wanted him they should just trade him and please make it Cincinnati.

Alex · 06-03-2010, 10:26 AM

I may be getting the history muddled a bit, but thinking back I think it was Alex Rodriguez that faced the charge he left because of the ballpark. His Safeco stats in 2000 were significantly lower than his road game stats.

Griffey's half season in Safeco in 1999 didn't show much difference from the first half.

06-03-2010, 09:05 AM	#121
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	I'm of the opinion that MLB is ultra-resistant to replay because it seems inevitable that it would lead to opening ball and strike calls to replay. The idea of the ball and strike calls from the ump being unquestionable is sacrosanct in the game, and opening that to replay would be a pretty radical change in what the game is to a lot of people. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

06-03-2010, 09:19 AM	#122
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I'm ok with it since the error was so completely clear and the change has only statistical significance. The winner is not changed. Nobody else is deprived of any meaningful achievement, etc. The net result officially is: Picture allowed one less hit, appeared for one less plate appearance, and three (?) fewer pitches. Batter achieved one less hit (which even he acknowledges was a mistake) Following batter loses one plate appearance. === Now, what I find interesting is how we perceive the relative importance. If the blown call had been in the first inning but otherwise everything else was identical, how much outrage would there be? One-hitters happen all the time but we only seem to care about that hit when it come in the ninth inning. I'm not a fan of replay in baseball but I'd be ok with a limited number of manager challenges for use in entirely unambiguous situations (that is, not only can you determine what the correct call should have been but you can say with certainty what the outcome of a correct call would have been; that second part is missing in most situations). Just to allow for the few times of extremely heightened importance to have recourse. I'd also be fine with umpires having discretion to ask for review help in unambiguous situations (though that might not have helped here since Joyce was absolutely certain of his call until he saw the replay). But I think widespread use of replay would fundamentally change the experience of watching baseball and actually increase the number of incorrect initial calls. The impact of error for a call is frequently asymmetrical. That is, in a given situation Call A instead of B may be more ambiguous than B instead of A, so the pressure would be to call B and let replay settle it, regardless of whether A was more obviously correct. Example: Line drive right over the first base bag and it hooks into the outfield corner. Stand up double for the batter but the guy on first is thrown out at home plate. Except umpire slipped a bit getting in position to make the fair/foul call and was a little bit late getting his eyes on it. He's 90% sure it just barely missed the chalk and was foul. But if he calls foul and is wrong, what do you do? You can't know that the batter wouldn't have tried for a triple, that the man on base would have been thrown out at home. You don't know that the batter wouldn't have slipped rounding first and have ended up with just a single. So better to call fair, let the play happen and then go to the replay booth because resetting to the correct foul call is easy.
	Submit to Quotes

06-03-2010, 09:22 AM	#123
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Regarding this specific case...I think I'm okay with it being overturned. The ump admitted afterwards he was wrong, the call was clearly and verifiably wrong, and overturning it would be a clean deal, not affecting any game outcomes or getting into any situation where you can't just assume everything afterwards would have happened the same if the right call had been made. Overturn the call, game ends then, the next at bat is wiped off the record, voila, balance restored. But I'm pretty sure that overturning it will be basically an admission that yes, instant replay for calls beyond homerun calls will be coming to baseball. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

06-03-2010, 09:33 AM	#124
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I agree, it is inevitable. I'm just not sure I'll like the result (I'm a mixed traditionalist, I abhor interleague play but love the wild card and designated hitter). I'd have no problem if remains used for only unambiguous (as defined by me above) situations but I doubt it would, because unambuous will be something that changes from moment to moment (a ball call on what would have been strike two is ambiguous, a ball call on what would have been strike three is not) and most of the time it is the ambiguous situations that are more significant and therefore the argument would be that it is more important that they be correct even if you can't correct them with certainty. == On Griffey retiring. I came to baseball late when I got to college and was given a sports obsessed roommate. I'd never even watched a game before then (and have still never actually played a game of baseball/softball in my life). Being introduced to the sport via the Seattle Mariners in 1992-1996 was a pretty good time to do it. Ken Griffey Jr. Randy Johnson Alex Rodriguez Edgar Martinez 3.5 Hall of Famers all on one overlooked team. Me leaving Seattle was about the same time that group imploded but I'm glad I got to see them. It was sad to see how quickly injuries overtook Griffey but also good to be reminded of the more natural arc of aging for baseball players.
	Submit to Quotes

06-03-2010, 09:43 AM	#125
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	It's weird to look at a guy who's #5 on the all time homer list and close to 3000 hits and think, "Man, so disappointing. I feel sorry for the guy." It really is astounding to ponder what he might have done had his body cooperated. But kudos to him for being a class act through what must have been an epic amount of frustration. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

06-03-2010, 09:53 AM	#126
Strangler Lewis Doing The Job Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: In a state Posts: 3,956	I don't see how a sport that still allows double plays to be turned by middle infielders in the vicinity of second base can introduce instant reply. Plus, as Alex has alluded to, unlike with football or tennis, there are things that can be happening with other base runners that can be affected by the blown call. It sounds like a big headache to puzzle out the situations in which it could be used from the situations in which it couldn't. I would hate to see instant reply used on balls and strikes. Unlike with football or tennis, the authority of the umpire is a big part of the culture. However, if it turns out that balls and strikes can be challenged, the umpires have only themselves to blame with guys like Eric Gregg saying, "Hey, you know what my strike zone is." __________________ Live now-pay later. Diner's Club!
	Submit to Quotes

06-03-2010, 10:16 AM	#129
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Maybe that was part of it, but there was no statistical evidence of it. He hit about half his home runs in 1999 in Safeco Field. But it wasn't like he left for the Yankees or something, he specifically wanted to go to Cincinnati where he'd grown up and deep roots with the team (it was where he grew up and his father played there through most of the '70s). Griffey's version is that a) he wanted to be closer to his family, but also that b) the management of the team came to him and said "we can keep you or A-Rod, who should it be?" His view was that if it they weren't sure they wanted him they should just trade him and please make it Cincinnati.
	Submit to Quotes

06-03-2010, 10:26 AM	#130
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I may be getting the history muddled a bit, but thinking back I think it was Alex Rodriguez that faced the charge he left because of the ballpark. His Safeco stats in 2000 were significantly lower than his road game stats. Griffey's half season in Safeco in 1999 didn't show much difference from the first half.
	Submit to Quotes