Time for instant replay!

[Go Cardinals]

We have seen it twice this week at Yankee stadium alone. I can't imagine how much it happens at other ballparks.

They should have 1 ump on instant replay. If the umps get together, then they should be able to see it.

Thoughts?

[SHOELESSJOE3]

We have seen it twice this week at Yankee stadium alone. I can't imagine how much it happens at other ballparks.

They should have 1 ump on instant replay. If the umps get together, then they should be able to see it.

Thoughts?

I could go for it if only for cases that we saw at NY in the last few days, balls that may have cleared a wall or not and fair or foul balls, thats as far as I would like to see it used.

[Go Cardinals]

I could go for it if only for cases that we saw at NY in the last few days, balls that may have cleared a wall or not and fair or foul balls, thats as far as I would like to see it used.

Well here's the thing, no matter what, what is ultimately the fairest thing? The fairest thing would be to have every play viewable.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Well here's the thing, no matter what, what is ultimately the fairest thing? The fairest thing would be to have every play viewable.

For one thing, balls clearing a fence or not, fair or foul are much easier to come to a conclusion. Were dealing with stationary objects a wall or fence and a foul line and the foul pole. It was very easy to see that Delgado home run was fair and easy to see that AROD's was also a home run, cleared the wall.

Plays on the bases, the ball beating or not beating the runner, tag plays yes some times it not that difficult to determine. But there are times we could see plays on the bases a thousand times and still can't be sure.

[Urbanshocker13]

I think it should only be on Homerun balls (like the Arod ball tonite that was such a horrible call!), I don't think it would work on other calls I think that would just slow the game down even more. I wounder how they would do it on the field. Would they have a little box like in the NFL that the ump looks through? Or would have someone appointed in the pressbox from MLB that reviews the call? Or would it be some other way that they do it.

[John Shoemaker]

I wouls like to see instant replay used on those neighborhood plays at second base where the unpire calls the runner out at second when the second baseman is nowhere near the bag.

[Urbanshocker13]

I wouls like to see instant replay used on those neighborhood plays at second base where the unpire calls the runner out at second when the second baseman is nowhere near the bag.

I could see managers useing that to death and really slowing up the game.

[Love The Game]

I am opposed to instant replay in baseball. It is the game in America with the most history and has always relied on human judgement. I love to see managers coming out of the dugout to argue calls of any type and think instant replay would take some of that out of the game. It's been modernized enough and needs to keep some of the roots that made it America's Pastime.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I wouls like to see instant replay used on those neighborhood plays at second base where the unpire calls the runner out at second when the second baseman is nowhere near the bag.

No good, getting into that grey area, tag plays, or foot on the bag. Sure at times we could see the play botched even with no replay, but some times can't tell either way. Homer, fair or foul that could be, stay off the bases.

[Brooklyn]

No good, getting into that grey area, tag plays, or foot on the bag. Sure at times we could see the play botched even with no replay, but some times can't tell either way. Homer, fair or foul that could be, stay off the bases.

Agreed, put it in for clear cut calls - homeruns, foul balls, etc, but tag plays would be too much. I'm all for putting in an electornic system for calling balls and strikes if there can be a system developed that is instantaneous, and has been tested to be accurate

[Urbanshocker13]

Agreed, put it in for clear cut calls - homeruns, foul balls, etc, but tag plays would be too much. I'm all for putting in an electornic system for calling balls and strikes if there can be a system developed that is instantaneous, and has been tested to be accurate

I think that would take something from the game, as there is some horrible strike and ball calls there is something about having the human factor in regards to balls & strikes. Having a Ump that's a hitter or pitchers ump adds to the uniqueness and strategy of the game. I just think it's better to have a humen back there instead of a computer.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Agreed, put it in for clear cut calls - homeruns, foul balls, etc, but tag plays would be too much. I'm all for putting in an electornic system for calling balls and strikes if there can be a system developed that is instantaneous, and has been tested to be accurate

Never say never, well I just said it twice. To get serious thats a long shot. Could any electronic device monitor the strike zone. Not sure of the exact wording but in the rule book the strike zone reads something to the effect " as the batter prepares to swing at the pitch." it would be difficult to monitor even a stationary target or batter, making it even more difficult if the batter strides into the pitch and then holds up, what about a checked or not checked swing.

I'm doubting that, who can say in the far future?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I am opposed to instant replay in baseball. It is the game in America with the most history and has always relied on human judgement. I love to see managers coming out of the dugout to argue calls of any type and think instant replay would take some of that out of the game. It's been modernized enough and needs to keep some of the roots that made it America's Pastime.

I feel this same way but at the same time, wouldn't mind seeing replay available only on fair/foul or questionable homeruns lik Arod's recent one. How often would it be used. Maybe 5-10 times per team, per season? Of course, one could then say, that if it doesn't happen that often, then what's the big deal. But maybe three of those are legit game breakers, which is a big swing; every division except two would have had different winners last year.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Never say never, well I just said it twice. To get serious thats a long shot. Could any electronic device monitor the strike zone. Not sure of the exact wording but in the rule book the strike zone reads something to the effect " as the batter prepares to swing at the pitch." it would be difficult to monitor even a stationary target or batter, making it even more difficult if the batter strides into the pitch and then holds up, what about a checked or not checked swing.

I'm doubting that, who can say in the far future?

True. It's supposed to be decided from the hitter's hitting position. I think they would have to make the players wear sensors at their knees and taped to their belly in order for consistently proper transmission. Don't hold your breath. I like that all umps interpret the zone different...it adds a twist for the hitters and pitchers. Having that been said, I wish all umps would agree on calling the high strike.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

True. It's supposed to be decided from the hitter's hitting position. I think they would have to make the players wear sensors at their knees and taped to their belly in order for consistently proper transmission. Don't hold your breath. I like that all umps interpret the zone different...it adds a twist for the hitters and pitchers. Having that been said, I wish all umps would agree on calling the high strike.

My exact words earlier, I can't see it, not in my lifetime. Would the sensors have to be checked before each at bat, how do we know they are consistent in their location for every at bat. If the batter hikes up his pants even an inch or so does that cut down on the verticle length of the zone, looks like it would, you can't make a rule banning that, raising the strike zone at the bottom. Or will the sensors be attached to the players body, under his uniform, could they later be moved or damaged in a slide. If attached under the uniform how do we know they are where they should be.

We still need an ump at home, batter out of the box, catcher interference ticking the bat, checked swings, foul tips sometimes so slight the ump has to rely on sound not vision. Batters being hit by a pitch, sometimes on the sleeve or uniform another situation where the ump relies on sound.

And again the batter could be a moving target, striding into a pitch but not swinging, the sensors are now a moving target. We all know for certain, on some calls one of the teams is going to claim the device was wrong on that call, it's not set up right, this will solve nothing. How many real big arguments per game do we see on balls and strikes and how would an electronic device making a call satisfy teams any more than a human being.

I can't see it an electronic device to measure, monitor the verticle of the strike zone and doing that with accuracy. Can't imagine a home plate ump which will be needed and he has refer to a device to determine the call.