I say there's no good reason why it doesn't already. I happen to think it should be used for any play/call where a run would potentially be scoring (disputed tag at the plate, etc), but I'd be content to at least just have it for making sure close homeruns are correctly called fair or foul.

WAY more often than not, the amount of time used up by managers arguing with umps is greater than that of simply rewinding and finding out for absolute sure. I know that our unsurpassingly retarded commissioner Bud Selig fears for the "purity" of the game. Yes, a purity consisting of interleague play (though of which I'm a fan, for the record), the DH rule and of course he himself burying his head in the sand for many many years while the rampant usage of steroids by so many players helped line the pockets of him as well as many other owners.

I just don't understand how those who apparently have no issue with replay being implemented in ALL OTHER major sports could justify its exclusion in baseball.

1. Majority of the time umpires get the right call the first time.

2. What are you going to use it on, the thing with strikezones, there isn't a set strike zone, each player, each pitcher, each umpire has he's own little changes upon the zone.

3. I like seeing the occasional bad call, and the resulting mound charge or manager-ump yelling match.

I'd rather they ban the DH-rule.

Let the pitchers bat.


I'm an American League fan, but seriously, this is stupid rule. Let's the pitcher only play half the game, and then aging ball sluggers get to continue their careers even though they don't have to play the field.

Well no, I thought I made that clear. The most it should be used is any play in which a run might've scored. That's all. Trying to take it into a balls and strikes is like opening a giant pandora's box.

IMO, replay should it ever be used should only be for determining whether or not a ball was in play, was a home run, etc. Anything else would take too much time.

Baseball Parks are all different they all have their own little nooks and crannies, it's just part of the game. If you want to make sure a ball is hit in play or a homerun. add another umpire, call him a line judge and make him be in the out field around the warning track.

Wes just out of curiosity, and actually I ask this really of all the people who completely oppose it.... if it were up to you, would instant replay be 100% removed from all professional sports in which it's currently employed?

No and I'm not completely opposed of it. Faster Uptempo sports like NFL and NBA I think benefit from it, because they are faster and more people to look at for rules violations and such. And they want to get the calls right, I'm all for getting the calls right.

Baseball though is one of those laid back sports that really don't need it, you see the action without blinking. You know exactly where the play is going to be because if you follow the ball, you can determine if the ball goes over the fence, inside the foul poles, beats the player bases, etc.

of course they should have it. Use it for fair/foul balls down the line and on home runs. Games already routinely take 3-4 hours, what's another 2 minutes to ensure a potential game changing play is called correctly?

This is the purely selfish reason why I'd oppose it. Baseball just isn't the same without the likes of Lou Piniella throwing temper tantrums.

Philosophically, though, the football fan in me is really bugged that an incorrect call can go unchallenged.

1) I agree (but they have fucked up 3 HR's this week alone)
2) Absolutely not for strike zones
3) You'd still have Piniella throwing his fits Taht's what would inspire the replay. HIm running out there, having a fit and then saying, "Fuck you asshole, repaly it!!!"

Baseball already is the slowest moving game so there is no reason why it can't be added. Make a limit to 1 or 2 per game to apply to HR's, catches/traps, and tag outs (perhaps foul balls).

I don't see it taking that much time. They already spend enough time together in their "conferences" discussing it. Why not actually spend that time looking at the video and get it right? They have the official scorer looking at replays anyways to determine the correct scoring. Why can't he do it?

But Wes, I see what you're saying, even with jsut watching the ball, they are getting alot of important calls wrong. I could see the OF ump getting in the way of an OF .. watching the ball and tyring to watch the OF at the same time could be a problem.

they have this in the playoffs and they still manage to fuck it up.

but you'd still have plays at the plate and safe/out calls at the other three bases....not to mention caught/trapped balls in the OF, balls/strikes, and tons of other stuff to argue.

Yes, but only on a disputed home run or fair/foul

I guess it depends how far you want to take the replay. I don't think anyone is going to argue in favor of it for the strike zone, so you're probably right in that regard.

There are so many calls during any given baseball game that I think the good and bad ones over the course of the 162 game season even out. No need for replay.

EDIT: Good topic, though.

Having instant replay available and utilized also keeps people honest.

For fair/foul plays (including home runs) and close plays at the bases. Not for balls/strikes or catch/trap plays.

the one negative I can think of for plays at the bases would be on double play balls since many times the 2B/SS never touches the bag. How do they account for that?

by the way, use of replay just from home runs is retarded. people act like home runs are the only thing that they need to make sure they always get right.