Thread: Is Instant Replay in Baseball a legitimate allegory for Big Gov incrementalism?

Watching the announcers at ESPN discuss this "issue" for months and hearing their hints at how replay will be eventually applied to more than just home run calls, I got this creepy feeling that there will be no Umpires in 30 years, because the Media wants to be MORE important.

Healthcare! women want it!

Instant Replay..... You know you want it... for everything!

Yes, you're nuts.

This pisses me off though, baseball isn't football, an umpires judgemnet is as much a part of the game as the distance from first to second base. I have no idea who MLB is trying to appease here, it certainly doesn't make the game better.

WTF? Since your poll doesn't even match your thread title then yes, you are nuts.

Football - Hmmmm! Believe there is instant replay and yet still have a referee, umpire, field judge, line judge, back judge, etc......

Basketball - Hmmmmm! Believe there is instant replay and yet referees have been increased from 2 to 3

Hockey - Hmmmmmm! Believe there is instant replay and yet they also increased from 1 ref. and 2 linesman to 2 refs. and 2 linesman

Tennis - Hmmmmmm! As long as the US Open is playing lets check out tennis. And voila, even tennis has instant replay and yet still has a chair umpire/referee and numerous others standing up watching either the lines or the waiting for the concrete to grow.

Baseball is already to slow to watch. BFD if they add another couple of minutes to it.

And yes, since you provided nothing to support your thread title, this thread should be moved to sports.

I watch Sports center every day and this replay thing is a cause celeb with them. The first time they used it in the Tampa game, the YES network called it a historical moment. They have interview segments on ESPN where they talk about the importance of "getting it right.." The other day, one of them suggested that computers could do a better job with balls and strikes......

A lot of people watch this stuff and so they create this self fulfilling prophecy, nudging the fans along toward the day when you won't be able to have a baseball game without their precious oversight.......

Umpires make the game fun. Their mistakes are like real life. You let the machines take over and it's the nanny state transferred to Sports....

Originally Posted by International Underwriter

WTF? Since your poll doesn't even match your thread title then yes, you are nuts.

Football - Hmmmm! Believe there is instant replay and yet still have a referee, umpire, field judge, line judge, back judge, etc......

Basketball - Hmmmmm! Believe there is instant replay and yet referees have been increased from 2 to 3

Hockey - Hmmmmmm! Believe there is instant replay and yet they also increased from 1 ref. and 2 linesman to 2 refs. and 2 linesman

Tennis - Hmmmmmm! As long as the US Open is playing lets check out tennis. And voila, even tennis has instant replay and yet still has a chair umpire/referee and numerous others standing up watching either the lines or the waiting for the concrete to grow.

Baseball is already to slow to watch. BFD if they add another couple of minutes to it.

And yes, since you provided nothing to support your thread title, this thread should be moved to sports.

Clearly you're not a baseball purist, most likely not even really a fan, usually the two go hand in hand. Baseball is very different from every other sport in that the umpires judgement is a part of the game. In football you either have your feet in bounds or you don't, you either catch the ball or you don't, you either fumble the ball or you don't.

Baseball has as much to do with how the game is called as it has to do with the players. Every ump in MLB has a different strike zone, and this is accepted as long as each ump is consistant in the way he calls balls and strikes. Human error is very much a part of the game, not only is it accepted, it's engrained. Introducing instant replay to the game is a slap in the face, and it's destined to fail. I hate this, and I'd bet my left arm 99.99% of baseball fans don't like it either.

Originally Posted by kmiller1610

I watch Sports center every day and this replay thing is a cause celeb with them. The first time they used it in the Tampa game, the YES network called it a historical moment. They have interview segments on ESPN where they talk about the importance of "getting it right.." The other day, one of them suggested that computers could do a better job with balls and strikes......

A lot of people watch this stuff and so they create this self fulfilling prophecy, nudging the fans along toward the day when you won't be able to have a baseball game without their precious oversight.......

Umpires make the game fun. Their mistakes are like real life. You let the machines take over and it's the nanny state transferred to Sports....

I agree, I can't believe they're doing this. I don't understand the point, who the hell are they trying to appeal to? It's not like it's a flawed game and by fixing it they'll draw more fans or something, you're a baseball fan or you're not a baseball fan, instant replay won't make the game better and it won't boost ticket sales. It's like they're making a rule for the sake of making a rule.

Originally Posted by Sparta

Clearly you're not a baseball purist, most likely not even really a fan, usually the two go hand in hand. Baseball is very different from every other sport in that the umpires judgement is a part of the game. In football you either have your feet in bounds or you don't, you either catch the ball or you don't, you either fumble the ball or you don't.

Baseball has as much to do with how the game is called as it has to do with the players. Every ump in MLB has a different strike zone, and this is accepted as long as each ump is consistant in the way he calls balls and strikes. Human error is very much a part of the game, not only is it accepted, it's engrained. Introducing instant replay to the game is a slap in the face, and it's destined to fail. I hate this, and I'd bet my left arm 99.99% of baseball fans don't like it either.

I'm prolly not even a fan? Amazing arrogance from someone who professes to be 7 years old.

1. As an administrator are you going to disagree that this belongs in Sports?

2. I hate arguing with 7 year olds, but please test my knowledge of baseball. I could probably name the 40 of the 50 minor league baseball prospects off the top of my head and prior to the 9/1 expanded rosters could name 90+% of each teams roster.

Gimme a break! Subjective criteria comes into play in most sports. One basketball ref may call a tight game while another might allow more physical play. Once again, as long as the calls are consistent it is okay with the players. Does every football ref, umpire, line judge, etc.... view holding exactly the same? And to use your football example, not every ref. views fumbling the same. Even with instant replay a ref's perspective comes into play. But maybe football is not your game.

Is a baseball purist one who agrees umpires should ignore the rulebook in calling balls and strikes? Maybe you feel a purist is one who says bringing pitchers in to pitch to one batter makes for an exciting game. Or maybe you feel we should go old time where every slide into second base came with spikes up? Or maybe after every home run, the next batter should have a pitch thrown at their head? or is that to purist for you? Or maybe only shoeless joe and the black sox are baseball purists to you? Since HGH/Steroids are part of the game I guess getting rid of those would be a non purist thing to do.

Or based on your sig., maybe it is just your infantile hatred of the how the yankees have been to the playoffs 13 straight years (amazing how I know that and yet not really a fan) because they bought players. You probably cheered when Brett's pine tar home run was reversed by the league overruling an on field umpire. Was that purist?

Maybe I could understand your point if you were whining about when a few years ago they did actually put in non human balls/strikes equipment at the BOB (now Chase Field) and another ballpark (might have been Chicago, Colorado - admittingly not sure of that one - guess that makes me not a purist), but this instant replay is so limited that it is not really worthy of this "world is ending" viewpoint.

Do I need to go further? Or do we need to expand into spitballs, etc.... for you to get the non-purist point.

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by International Underwriter

I'm prolly not even a fan? Amazing arrogance from someone who professes to be 7 years old.

It was a guess, there's no reason for you to get all on your period about it.

1. As an administrator are you going to disagree that this belongs in Sports?

I'm going to wait and see if he somehow ties this in to big government, I don't have to make the decision now, the sky won't fall.

2. I hate arguing with 7 year olds, but please test my knowledge of baseball.

OK, question number one, do you think instant replay should be allowed in baseball?

I could probably name the 40 of the 50 minor league baseball prospects off the top of my head and prior to the 9/1 expanded rosters could name 90+% of each teams roster.

That wouldn't make you so much of a baseball fan as it would make you sort of weird, I mean I guess if there was use for that sort of information short of being a scout then I could see it, or maybe you've got a memory that doesn't require synthetic stimulis like the rest of us, don't really know.

Gimme a break! Subjective criteria comes into play in most sports. One basketball ref may call a tight game while another might allow more physical play.

B. Personal Foul

Here is the "subjective" rule regarding personal fouls according to the NBA:
Section I--Types
a. A player shall not hold, push, charge into, impede the progress of an oppo-nent by extending a hand, forearm, leg or knee or by bending the body into a posi-tion that is not normal. Contact that results in the re-routing of an opponent is a foul which must be called immediately.
b. Contact initiated by the defensive player guarding a player with the ball is not legal. This contact includes, but is not limited to, forearm, hands, or body check.
EXCEPTIONS:
(1) A defender may apply contact with a forearm to an offensive player with the ball who has his back to the basket below the free throw line extend-ed outside the Lower Defensive Box.
(2) A defender may apply contact with a forearm and/or one hand with a bent elbow to an offensive player in a post-up position with the ball in the Lower Defensive Box.
(3) A defender may apply contact with a forearm to an offensive player with the ball at any time in the Lower Defensive Box. The forearm in the above exceptions is solely for the purpose of main-taining a defensive position.
(4) A defender may position his leg between the legs of an offensive player in a post-up position in the Lower Defensive Box for the purpose of main-taining defensive position. If his foot leaves the floor in an attempt to dis-lodge his opponent, it is a foul immediately.
(5) Incidental contact with the hand against an offensive player shall be ignored if it does not affect the player's speed, quickness, balance and/or rhythm.
c. Any player whose actions against an opponent cause illegal contact with yet another opponent has committed the personal foul.
d. A personal foul committed by the offensive team during a throw-in shall be an offensive foul, regardless of whether the ball has been released.
e. Contact which occurs on the hand of the offensive player, while that hand is in contact with the ball, is legal.
EXCEPTION: Flagrant, elbow and punching fouls.
PENALTIES: The offender is charged with a personal foul. The offended team is charged with a team foul if the illegal contact was caused by the defender. There is no team foul if there are personal fouls on one member of each team or the per- sonal foul is against an offensive player. The offended team is awarded:
(1) the ball out-of-bounds on the sideline at the nearest spot where play was interrupted but no nearer to the baseline than the free throw line extend-ed if an offensive foul is assessed.
(2) the ball out-of-bounds on the sideline where play was interrupted but no nearer to the baseline than the free throw line extended if the personal foul is on the defender and if the penalty situation is not in effect.
(3) one free throw attempt if the personal foul is on the defender and there is a successful field goal or free throw on the play.
(4) two/three free throw attempts if the personal foul is on the defender and the offensive player is in the act of shooting an unsuccessful field goal.
(5) one free throw attempt plus a penalty free throw attempt if the personal foul is on the defender and the offensive player is not in the act of attempting a field goal if the penalty situation is in effect.
(6) one free throw attempt and possession of the ball on the sideline nearest the spot where play was interrupted if an offensive player, or a teammate, is fouled while having a clear-path-to-the-basket. The ball and an offen-sive player must be positioned between the tip-of-circle extended in the backcourt and the basket in the frontcourt, with no defender between the ball and the basket when the personal foul occurs. There must be team control and the new play must originate in the backcourt, including throw-ins, and the offended team must be deprived of an opportunity to score an uncontested basket.
(7) two free throw attempts if the personal foul is for illegal contact with an elbow. The elbow foul may be assessed whether the ball is dead or alive. Free throw attempts are awarded whether the ball is dead, alive, loose or away-from-the-play in the last two minutes of regulation or overtime(s). Contact must occur for an elbow foul to be assessed. It is an unsports-manlike act whether or not there is contact. (See Rule 12A--Section VII-- d(6) for non-contact.) If the deliberate elbow contact is above shoulder level, the player will be ejected. If the elbow contact is shoulder level or below, the player may be ejected at the discretion of the official. In all of these situations, the official has the discretion of assessing a fla-grant foul (1) or (2).
(8) two free throw attempts if a personal foul is committed by a defender prior to the ball being released on a throw-in.
EXCEPTION: Rule 12B--Section X.
(9) two free throw attempts if a personal foul is committed against an offen-sive player without the ball when his team has at least a one-man advan-tage on a fast break and the defensive player takes a foul to stop play.



Note the difference in the definitions, this one actually allows for descretion in the observance of the strike zone:
Major League Baseball defines, in the most recent issue of its official rule book (Definition of Terms - 2.00), a baseball strikezone with the following description:

The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the knee cap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.

Once again, as long as the calls are consistent it is okay with the players. Does every football ref, umpire, line judge, etc.... view holding exactly the same? And to use your football example, not every ref. views fumbling the same. Even with instant replay a ref's perspective comes into play. But maybe football is not your game.

From NFL.com
THE FUMBLE

When the ball carrier or passer drops the ball, that's a fumble. Any player on the field can recover the ball by diving on it or he can run with it. The team that recovers a fumble either gets-or retains-possession of the ball.

Is a baseball purist one who agrees umpires should ignore the rulebook in calling balls and strikes?

It's a person who believes the rules are fine the way they are, they don't much care for the DH, "juiced" players or balls, computers tracking balls and strikes, or the instant replay.

Or based on your sig., maybe it is just your infantile hatred of the how the yankees have been to the playoffs 13 straight years (amazing how I know that and yet not really a fan) because they bought players.

The Yankees didn't make the playoffs by buying players, they had their most successfull recent years by developing talent, everyone knows that.
I don't hate the Yankees, I'm rooting for them against the Rays, I wish they didn't suck quite so bad, we need some help taking that top spot.
It's a pity thing this year.

You probably cheered when Brett's pine tar home run was reversed by the league overruling an on field umpire. Was that purist?

Why would I cheer that?

Maybe I could understand your point if you were whining about when a few years ago they did actually put in non human balls/strikes equipment at the BOB (now Chase Field) and another ballpark (might have been Chicago, Colorado - admittingly not sure of that one - guess that makes me not a purist), but this instant replay is so limited that it is not really worthy of this "world is ending" viewpoint.

It's called QuesTec, and it isn't used in game. I could care less how MLB trains their umps, but I don't like that they use it as a grading system. If the topic was "Is QuesTec's use in Baseball a legitimate allegory for Big Gov incrementalism?" I'd be talking about it.

Do I need to go further? Or do we need to expand into spitballs, etc.... for you to get the non-purist point.

Go further or don't, but if you've been trying to impress me you should definately go a bit further, you aint there yet.

I'll attempt to tie this into Politics (and news and sports) ......

Whenever a news outlet starts to push something at me, I resent it.

When Lady Dianna died, it was an entire week exploring this person. This was a moderately attractive woman who got one of the Royals to warm up to her. That was it. But somehow, she deserved an entire week.

Hurricane Katrina was worse. The story line became, "it's the fed's fault.." when the obvious truth was "these people are too stupid to live..." Everybody was into it 24/7, even the conservative channels. The TV news guy is standing there saying, look at this, where is FEMA!!!!??? as though it's federal responsibility to save every stupid person on the planet. I can even understand the complaints against those in charge, but with some limits, please.

Now the ESPN radio guys tend to be really self serving (especially the afternoon guys). They run clips about how we should care about Bret Farve and Dallas and T.O because those things are interesting. It's as though they are starting their own little cult and trying to get me to join.

The regular appearance of examples of why baseball needs instant replay began to appear last year. Now the league suddenly decides to institute it?

When the media no longer sees themselves as a provider of services and begins to think of itself as a shaper of events, it's so much like what government has become, it makes my skin crawl.

Originally Posted by kmiller1610

I'll attempt to tie this into Politics (and news and sports) ......

Whenever a news outlet starts to push something at me, I resent it.

When Lady Dianna died, it was an entire week exploring this person. This was a moderately attractive woman who got one of the Royals to warm up to her. That was it. But somehow, she deserved an entire week.

Hurricane Katrina was worse. The story line became, "it's the fed's fault.." when the obvious truth was "these people are too stupid to live..." Everybody was into it 24/7, even the conservative channels. The TV news guy is standing there saying, look at this, where is FEMA!!!!??? as though it's federal responsibility to save every stupid person on the planet. I can even understand the complaints against those in charge, but with some limits, please.

Now the ESPN radio guys tend to be really self serving (especially the afternoon guys). They run clips about how we should care about Bret Farve and Dallas and T.O because those things are interesting. It's as though they are starting their own little cult and trying to get me to join.

The regular appearance of examples of why baseball needs instant replay began to appear last year. Now the league suddenly decides to institute it?

When the media no longer sees themselves as a provider of services and begins to think of itself as a shaper of events, it's so much like what government has become, it makes my skin crawl.

It's interesting, professional baseball existed in this country since 1869 and has never needed a back-up system to figure out whether a ball was a home run until 2008. Stupid as hell, "progress" for the sake of progress.