Friday, August 06, 2010

Only idiots are against instant replay in baseball

It has come to this.

Name calling.

I've written about Instant Replay several times and it isn't worth rehashing EVERYTHING. But tonight's travesty just got me fired up again.

The Marlins won the game tonight beating the Phillies in the 9th.
Except they didn't because of a blown call reversed a walk off hit.

It's kind of like how the Giants won a game a few weeks ago... except that they didn't because of the blown call on the final play.

In a year with so many tight races in the National League, a game could be all that keeps the Giants out of the playoffs.

Or maybe the Phillies sneak in by a game.

Exactly what is it going to take for the anti Instant Replay dolts to come around?

We've had a perfect game taken away from a pitcher.
We've had blown calls left and right in the 2009 post season.

Will it take a walk off hit in the post season being taken away?
Seriously, opponents of Instant Replay, what would have happened if tonight's grotesque call by Bob Davidson had taken place in the Division Series... or the NLCS... or the World Series?

Is that what it will take to get some sort of replay system in place?

And as always the whole "it will slow down the pace of the game" argument is not only nonsense and asinine, but is untrue.

The replay showed that Davidson's call was dead wrong while Marlins manager Edwin Rodriguez was still on the field arguing.

So time WAS wasted on the call... and it was truly wasted because nothing was done or could be done.

Davidson can only arrogantly shake his head no, dead certain that he got the call right... only to have every single replay showing over and over again that Davidson's confidence is unfounded.

Once again, the rest of the planet has access to the undeniable truth that the call was blown except the one person who could use the information to... and please brace yourself for this outlandish idea... GET THE CALL RIGHT!

I am DYING to hear a valid argument against instant replay.

I am guessing I'm not going to hear them.

Follow sullybaseball on Twitter


  1. Anonymous5:57 AM

    5 umpire crew. Man in the replay booth. No manager involvement (read: challenges). Blatant blown call...replay ump buzzes home plate. Not me look. Fair/Foul. Home Run or not. And tag plays, safe/out if they are BLATANTLY wrong. If they're bang/bang, let them go.

    And to offset the the strike zone. Letters to knees, just like it was when I was a kid. More strikes=fewer pitches=more balls in play = less balls squared up = more action and faster play.

  2. Anonymous... I wish you were the commissioner of baseball

  3. For balls down the line... I don't think replay is needed but a "Skyhawk" type system like they use in tennis... takes a matter of seconds.

  4. Anonymous6:04 PM

    No instant replay. Keep it the way it is.

  5. Ah yes... who cares if things are RIGHT?

  6. Anonymous7:13 PM

    Well Sully, here are my thoughts. I jump around a bit.

    I'v been playing baseball all my life. I play in college and go to Iowa, Michigan, and Colorado in the summer to play in leagues. Now Im probably not gonna get drafted, the odds are against me, but I love game and the way is played and I think it should stay that way it has been played for years, so call me old fashioned. Replay would take out a part of the game the fans seem to love, arguments. I don't know any fan who doesn't love to see irate players and managers charge out of the dugout and get in an umps face. And in the replay of the Marlins call, can you assure me that the ball crossed over the bag fair. Regardless of where it landed before or after the bag can you 100 percent guarantee me from the angle that the cameras gives us can, you can absolutely say it crossed the bag in fair territory. Sure the ball lands in fair territory but that does not mean it crossed the bag in fair territory. The ump had a better angle than the cameras.
    Now quite frankly I think you are a little out of line saying that "Only idiots are against instant replay" because in that case you are calling men like Joe Torre, Mark Grace, Tommy Lasorda, Doug Harvey, Harmon Killebrew, and many others idiots. Now sure, I can respect certain people who want instant replay when voiced in a respectful manner. But when people voice their opinions in a disrespectful way, you are ultimately insulting a game that has been played the same way for many many years, not to mention the men who have played in the past and present. Have some integrity and act like a man and go about it in a respectful way.

  7. Maybe I should have rephrased it...
    Maybe I should have said "there's no good reason to NOT have instant replay" which I stand by.

    In all due respect to you, you didn't really give me a reason. "it should stay that way it has been played for years" is no reason. We'd have no helmets, no play by play on the radio, no catchers masks and no integration if that was the mind set.

    I am not saying to change how baseball is played. I want the calls right.

    Without appealing to authority nor to emotion, please tell me why getting the call RIGHT is bad?

    Also, know that this blog is tongue in cheek. Things I type can sometimes be exaggerated for comedic effect. When I posted a picture of Saddam Hussein's statue being toppled when it was announced that Bud Selig was getting a statue, I wasn't REALLY equating the two.

    I stand by, I have yet to hear a valid reason to not have instant replay.

    I'm still waiting

  8. Anonymous7:56 PM

    Im just wondering. Have you played competitive baseball?

  9. Nope.

    And how is that relevant to this discussion?

  10. Anonymous8:30 PM

    Say you make a change in a call and there are runners on base. How would you determine where the runners go? Too complicated to deal with that. I don't see managers like Joe Girardi throwing red flags outta the dugout. It would slow down a game that is already ripped on for being too slow, probably lose more fans that way. I mean if you ask any non-baseball person why they don't like baseball. The respond with answers like, I'd rather watch paint dry or its boring as shit. That's why if you add in instant replay you take out the arguments. Something non-baseball fans actually enjoy. You lose the fans that already find it boring and long and gut it out anyway if you add replay. You take out the human error part of the game. Why not just use robots instead? Where does it all end? Cause you know that people are gonna start arguing balls and strikes and call for instant replay on that also. Complications from the installation of replay would ruin the game. Sure you would get the calls correct, but what happens after that would ruin the game. Baseball wants to increase attendance but in all reality their is a very good chance it would decrease from instant replay cause it would make it longer, more complicated, and take away something fans love to see.

    And I am still waiting for a response about the Marlins call. Because truly, he did have a better angle than the views we have. I have been watching it. You can't say with 100% certainty that it crossed the bag fair due to the camera angle. You can obviously see that it crossed after the bag, but you cannot tell when it is over the bag. With the camera angles we have now, it would not have been overturned due to lack of circumstantial evidence.

  11. Anonymous8:43 PM

    Well I have come to realize that people who haven't played the game ones, who don't truly understand it are a little quick with the whole replay thing. Yes their are major leaguers who like the idea but, like Joe Morgan said on a Sunday night baseball game, it would be a complicated thing because of how you would handle it was runners on base and other situations like bunting, first and thirds, and so on. Former and current players/umps understand the complications behind getting a call right. Unlike most writers and fans. Their is more to it than just getting the call right too many other important factors would have to go into it. If they figured out a way to have instant replay and keep it really the same game, then honestly, I might like it. But with the way I see it now, it would only complicate things.

  12. You make the calls right as per the rules... for example the A-Rod slapping the ball out of Arroyo's glove (a call the umps got right after a conference, but only after the replays showed over and over and over again it was a no brainer.)

    A-Rod was called out and Jeter returned to first base.

    Are you really saying that non baseball fans want to see arguing? I don't understand.

    I take it you are against the use of Instant Replay to determine if a home run cleared the fence or was fair or foul?

  13. You are making an appeal to authority, which is a logical fallacy.

    At first you say the game is too slow for fans and then you saw fans like to see the game slowed down by arguments.

    And I am STILL waiting for a reason that isn't an appeal to emotion nor to authority.

    "Hey Twins. Sorry those calls went so against you in the playoffs... but Harmon Killebrew doesn't like this and fans like arguing"

  14. Anonymous9:27 PM

    No I don't really care about the homerun thing, Im against it expanding. And when a hall of fame player brings that up as a cause for concern then it should be taken seriously. And with it slowing down the game. Yes arguments slow down a game as would replays. But the arguments are exciting to watch, like I said, a lot of people out there don't like watching baseball because they think it is boring. The arguments add excitement to the game, maybe even more than a homerun. Maybe the game would take just as long with arguments as it would instant replay but the lack of excitement would be worse for baseball. And with the A-Rod play. The umps got the call correct without instant replay didn't they?

    And about that Marlins play?

  15. Anonymous9:40 PM

    And what about runners advancing on foul balls overturned? How do they determine that? You're gonna tell me that Brett Gardner would the same amount of bags as Posada, Ortiz, and Manny?

    My opinions come from listening to announcers on TV watching games. Talking to my fellow teammates, coaches, and opponents. As a whole we don't wanna see the game we grew up loving get changed so drastically. We understand that bad calls are made, but we use that as reason to get better. We don't make excuses for why we lost because if you go back and think about the game there are many things that could have changed the outcome. Not executing on sac bunts, errors, pitchers missing spots, and other mental parts of the game. My team actually missed out on the tournament due to a bad call. We didn't let it bother us. What's done is done, you move on. Bad call the one game you move on and don't even think about that last game. It doesn't matter anymore. You go out and focus on the next game, series, or season.

  16. Who is calling it to be changed drastically?
    I am wanting calls to be made correctly and the results of the players efforts to be rewarded.

    Everything you have given me is pleas to authority and special pleading... both logical fallacies.

    As for the Brett Gardner as opposed to Posada and Ortiz... yes, you make the call as the game sees fit. There are times the umpire will award an extra base on a play now taking in consideration who the runner is.

    "We don't make excuses for why we lost"

    Fine, but if you SHOULDN'T have lost but someone's bad call MAKES you lose, shouldn't that be corrected.

    I will ask the question again which you haven't answered straight yet:

    Why is getting the call RIGHT bad and getting the call WRONG not bad?

  17. Anonymous11:49 PM

    Look, we did not lose because of 1 call. Sure that is the 1 call that sticks out in the minds but it we really lost the game to other plays like I said. Baseball is not decided by 1 play.
    Of course get the calls right, everyone wants that. But instant replay is not needed. The umps want to get the call right and they do their best and they do a good enough job as it is, the game goes on just fine without it.
    You keep mentioning that I have not answered your question and the ones that I have given are fallacies and they are based on emotion. Well this is based on emotion and they are logical answers. I know, because I hear ex and current players in the league say these things on TV and the radio. Stop dwelling on 1 thing out of a whole 9 inning game. Teams do not lose because of 1 lousy play or call. The whole making the call as seen fit, what kind of call/rule would that be. That's what I'm talking about. You add replay to and it has a domino effect on the other parts of the game, the little things. Which in turn leads to the game changing completely.
    And what's is wrong with coming up with answers based on emotion? You seemed very emotional in you blog about the "Marlins blown call" which you still haven't answered me on. Fallacies, get of your computer and go play some stickball in a vacant lot, compete a little bit. Understand that this game is based on emotion. You put instant replay in this game and what do you have. A game controlled by robots that has nothing exciting about it. People love this game for what it is. They have loved from the begging and have dealt with the human element of the game for years. Sure instant replay wasn't around for them back in the 40's. The human element was good enough back then it is good enough now. The difference is we have writers now who only dwell of failure and fail to look at big picture, the game of baseball as a whole. Did you know that both teams left 11 men on base in that Phillies Marlins game? Without looking it up? The Marlins went 2-14 with runners on base, that's .142, and the Phillies went 3-10, that's .300. With runners in scoring the Marlins stranded 8 runners and the Phillies left 6 on. That is the kind of stuff that doesn't get covered in baseball games that matters. Not one lousy call.
    I bet your in favor of getting rid of the ump behind the plate. Let's get rid of the whole human element of the game, except the players, and turn this great game into a joke. And from a players point of view. You go in knowing what is at stake, you realize that that can happen. Armando Gallarrga didn't let it bother him. He moved on. Jim Leyland, said "You don't wanna down play the call but at the same time, you know its the human element we all make mistakes. It was an innocent mistake". He goes on to say that "this guy is one of the best, he is one of the best guys". Which is later proven when he was voted the best umpire in the league by the players after he blew that call That's is the right way to go about it. You don't bitch and moan like a 6th grade part time travel team. What is one of the first things you are taught when you play ball. Don't let the call bother you, keep playing.
    What you might not understand is that this game is about passion. This game is about emotion, you need things like that in order to play in the long season baseball has. So to say that my reasons are based on emotion so that's not a valid point as to why we shouldn't have replay in baseball.

  18. "What you might not understand is that this game is about passion"

    I write 100 posts a month without getting paid about baseball
    I understand it is about passion.

    Did you read my post about the 1987 World Series and Instant Replay?

    A game, like a life, is the sum total of all the plays. A bad call at one point can change the whole trajectory of the game.

    "Let's get rid of the whole human element of the game, except the players, and turn this great game into a joke"




  19. Still waiting for a reason why, when we see a call is blown, we can't correct it...

    Because.... why?

    You wrote a lot and still made special pleading and appeals to authority and didn't answer my question

  20. Anonymous9:31 AM

    I don't care if you write 100 posts a month. You could write 1,000 a month, but you never have actually played the game so you don't truly know you are just a wanna be. You are some blogger who looks like he has never put on a jockstrap in your life. Sure you might like baseball but since you have never actually played a meaningful game you don't understand what a change like replay can do to a baseball game in the long run, you only care about fixing 1 little call. You say that you write 100 blogs a month without getting paid, so you know the game is about passion. Is that's a joke? Writing about it without getting paid does not mean you understand the game is about passion, you can write it sure, but you don't understand it. All you do is write, haven't felt the pressures of the game. You don't know what it feels like to be in the bottom the 9th and up to the plate with a runner in scoring position and you are the guy who drives him in to win the game. Tell me what you feel there? You can explain in writing sure, but you don't truly know what it feels like. You use your writing as an excuse to say you understand the game. It is pieces of shit like you who will ruin this game of baseball under the excuse of they care. You don't really care about the game, sure you say you do, but you truly don't. And no I didn't read your article about the 1987 game and I don't plan too. I only found this one when I typed in idiots who want replay in baseball in google. Now if you truly understood the game you would have taken those stats that I have given you and realized that the Marlins lost that game because they didn't execute. 8 men stranded in scoring position, 11 men left on base total with a .142 average. The Marlins lost because of lack of execution. Not one call that actually was the right call. Even if there was instant replay it would not have been overturned because you do not have circumstantial evidence that it crossed the bag fair. So, then what would you have to say about the Bartman call? That one play cause Alex Gonzalez to botch that ground ball in turn causing the Cubs to lose.

    "Let's get rid of the whole human element of the game, except the players, and turn this great game into a joke". Why not just use robots instead of umpires, call the balls and strikes. Take away the human element of the game. Doug Harvey mentioned that in some interview.

  21. Anonymous9:37 AM

    Start thinking as to reasons why the baseball players who don't want instant replay come to think that way? Instead of giving me these bullshit responses that are really either just saying correct and wrong call or talking around why you truly don't understand the game.

  22. ". You are some blogger who looks like he has never put on a jockstrap in your life. "

    Ahhh... now you are adding personal attacks to your argument.

    Appeals to authority PLUS Argumentum Ad Hominem. You are combining your logical fallacies.

    This must be the respectful debating technique you were mentioning earlier.


    It was fair down the line and and landed fair beyond the bag. Short of a miracle or an orbital shift of the Earth, it was fair over the bag.

    Do you like it when umpires have different strike zones or some punk umpire like in that Phillies game throws out Ryan Howard when the ump was clearly picking a fight?

    I like calls being done right.

  23. "Start thinking as to reasons why the baseball players who don't want instant replay come to think that way? Instead of giving me these bullshit responses that are really either just saying correct and wrong call or talking around why you truly don't understand the game. "

    That's an appeal to authority.

    Such and such is smart ergo his opinion means more than yours.

    Not if they are wrong.

    Still waiting for a reason why getting the calls RIGHT is such a bad thing.

    See if you can respond without the following logical fallacies:

    Personal attacks

    Appeals to Authority

    Argumentum ad Populum (in other words "Everyone else thinks this)

    Appeal to tradition

    Appeal to emotion

    All of those are meaningless in a debate.

    Here's my stance.
    "I want as many possible calls in a baseball game to be correct and if we have the techonology to correct mistakes, we should use it."

    I am wrong because.....?

  24. Memo Paris9:57 AM

    i think his weakest arguement is essentially ..."you can't think or talk or blog about baseball because you never played baseball." huh?

    If that were the case a whole lot of sports writers, producers, filmmakers, and on air talent would all be out of work. In fact, Sully and Michael Wilbon of Pardon The Interruption have virtually the same amount of playing experience...

    So I guess we should all stfu about instant replay and bow to the opinion of Mr. Anonymous who's impressive claim to fame is that he can sweat in his jockstrap.

    signed, Anonymous (but not that other douche bag Anoymous)

  25. sully you should have some experience playing the game and how it feels to actually be involved in it before you begin to discuss changing the games rules

  26. So only players can suggest things like "We should get the calls right"?


    Explain your logic

    Should only race car drivers be allowed to design engines?

  27. this is a topic in which those who have never played the game cannot understand what the umpires add to it and what having every call perfect would take away from the game.

  28. ive recently read an article by Derek Jeter that I think can explain to you exactly what i mean.

  29. "having every call perfect would take away from the game"


    And what else in life do you apply this logic to?

  30. you said it exactly it is a GAME, its not a science or math where everything should be perfect, its the emotion and difference about the game that makes people love it as much as i do.

  31. I love the game too... and when a player does something, they should be credited with that they did.

    Still not sure how getting calls right is bad.

    When they used instant replay and determined that Brian McCann's double was a walk off homer, did it make you mad? Did you say "Damn it! It was called a double and it should REMAIN a double"?

    I'm just curious

  32. not that i wouldnt want every call to be right and for players to get what they deserve but by making it certain that every play is perfect, you are taking opinions and arguments out of the game making it simply black and white.

  33. No... I am doing 2 things:

    1) I am BEGGING people to give a counter argument based upon LOGIC

    2) I am writing with exaggerated style for humor and to get some attention.

    The tone of this site is supposed to be humorous. Yes I express my opinions, but things tended to be written with a little bit of a smirk.

    But I am fed up with the fact that I have yet to hear an argument AGAINST instant replay that isn't:

    1) An appeal to emotion
    2) An appeal to tradition
    3) An appeal to authority
    4) A personal attack

    All logical fallacies.

    ONE logical answer is all I ask

    (By the way, Jeter is against it... Bob Costas is for it... both appeals to authority. Both meaningless in a discussion)

  34. As for opinions of what happened in the game... it isn't ABOUT opinions. It IS about being black and white.

    It WAS a homer.
    Jorge Orta WAS out in 1985.
    Armando Gallaraga DID pitch a perfect game.

    It's not like "Oh, in my opinion it was a double"
    It WAS. We have the video proof.

    Again... I BEG everyone to just give me one logical reason

  35. Anonymous8:12 PM

    To sully...ur a h o m o .

  36. Sadly that is the most logical argument I've heard against instant replay

    Why are all my smartest readers Anonymous?

  37. Chris5:50 AM

    I agree Sully is a Flamming HOMO! and i also agree with joe if you've never played the game then you dont know.

  38. "if you've never played the game then you dont know."

    I don't know?
    I don't know what?
    That the call was wrong?

    I saw it was wrong... on instant replay.

    Not opinions... facts.

  39. jstunna2:10 PM

    well if you wanna be a fag and make the game boring, im all for replay, if you wanna keep it the way it has been for a hundred years which has seemed to work, thats cool too...

  40. Chris2:24 PM

    Got emm i think Sully that you need to get off the subject if you know nothing about baseball...

  41. jstunna2:26 PM

    you know about stats and facts but you dont understand it from a players standpoint, which is what actually counts!!

  42. "if you wanna be a fag and make the game boring"

    Wow. Nothing like a little homophobia to mix in with idiocy

    Answer this question LOGICALLY please:

    What is wrong with getting the calls RIGHT?

  43. (It's amazing... jstunna has given me arguments from tradition and authority... and homophobia... yet not from logic. Pretty impressive)

  44. jstunna8:57 AM

    must everything be logical? cant something be great just because it is?

  45. Let me ask you a question...
    When Brian McCann's walk off home run was first ruled a double a few weeks ago and then replay was used to correct it... were you pissed off?


    Please answer without homophobic remarks

  46. jstuna12:02 PM

    obviously I was not angered by the right call being made, because i believe that reviewing homeruns is acceptable but i do not believe in taking the game out of the umpires hands.

  47. What if the replay official is an umpire?

  48. jstunna9:54 AM

    why not just add another umpire to the field if your just going to have an umpire review calls, have one official who watches the entire field,reviewing other calls.

  49. So add another set of eyes on the field who is not allowed to use the technology that we have to correct bad calls?

    That helps how...?

    And isn't reviewing home runs "taking the game out of the umpires hands"?

  50. jstunna2:18 PM

    iight go get a life sully, maybe try, PLAYING some baseball.

  51. I knew you wouldn't be able to do it.
    But at least you've moved off of the homophobic comments.

    (Guys wandering around blog comment sections are telling ME to get a life. Innnnnteresting)

  52. jstunna5:08 AM

    i was writing an essay about this topic for a D1 high school baseball team, whats your excuse?

  53. My excuse?

    For what?

  54. jstunna9:50 AM

    having no life and blogging about something you have nothing to do with.

  55. So this is your logical reply to my challenge?
    To keep posting on my blog saying I'M the one with no life.

    Good luck with your essay. You clearly are using your time well

  56. are you watching this critical Giants game?
    Umps blew a call
    We all saw beyond ANY doubt he was wrong in 20 seconds

    Your argument is completely illogical and incorrect

    We need instant replay
    Anyone who says differently is insane

  57. Seriously...

    I defy anyone to give me ONE REASON why we shouldn't have instant replay that makes sense.

    Seriously... the challenge is there
    Instead of a double that Torres hit he got a single and was erased on a double play

    Opponents of instant replay are actually saying "We don't care what the players do. We don't think players should be credited for what they do."

    Seriously... why do you think that players shouldn't be credited for what they do?

  58. big jake9:42 AM

    shutup :'(

  59. I like that you gave your emoticon a nose

  60. big jake7:49 AM

    thats a tear...

  61. Anonymous5:49 PM

    umm sully first of all , your a jackass. and second of all, just because you dont agree with the fact that baseball has been americas number 1 pastime and number 1 most loved game w/o instant replay you shouldnt call the people that dont want the game to change idiots. your the idiot for wanting to change the perfect game of baseball to some technological game. we have human blues for a reason. if they wanted every freakin call to be perfect they wouldve made robots to do the damn job

  62. Anon...

    First of all it is "you're" not "your" in this context

    Secondly the title was tongue in cheek

    Thirdly I don't want to change the game at all. I want players to be credited for what they do

    Fourthly, will you take my challenge of offering a single LOGICAL reason for why blown calls are good?

  63. Here's another take on instant replay.

    Care to exchange blogrolls, Sull?