Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

Two very close calls in the Padres/Red Sox game got overturned, both correctly, but IMO there's no way they overturn these calls based on what one of the other umpires saw.

Brian Knight was the 3rd base umpire and ruled a diving trap by Manny a catch. Manny tumbled in a manner where his body blocked it from the 1st and 2nd base umpires. Did the home plate umpire honestly get so much of a better look to rule that a single?

Later in the game a home run hits a weird part of the foul pole which extends from the main pole and juts left. As a result the ball hit off it and bounced to the right. (Instead of normal foul pole action.)

It seems very obvious to me that at this point in time, umpires are effectively getting instant replay and somewhere there's someone forwarding what the correct call is.

Am I a crazy conspiracy nut? I'm of the opinion they should, but I think they should admit to it.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

I don't understand overturning calls anyway. Aren't calls supposed to be umpires' judgments? What is the difference between overturning an umpire's ruling on a trapped ball call vs. overturning an umpire's ruling on a called strike, or safe or out at first base?

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

Hasn't there been multiple cases of baseball umps overturning calls based on instant replay.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand overturning calls anyway. Aren't calls supposed to be umpires' judgments? What is the difference between overturning an umpire's ruling on a trapped ball call vs. overturning an umpire's ruling on a called strike, or safe or out at first base?

[/ QUOTE ]

4 eyes are better than 2, and 6 than 4 and so on.

I'll give you the most rudimentary example.

Imagine a close play with at first. The first basemen has to go up the line to catch the ball. The ball beats the runner.

http://img452.imageshack.us/img452/2963/shitpicdq7.gif

F1V = Field Ump 1's View: It is his call. He will see the first baseman catching the ball w/ his foot on the base.

PUV = Home Plate Ump's View: He is watching the play and can see that the first baseman has pulled his foot.

The confer, HP overrules F1, the system worked.

Overturning calls is really, really necessary. There are bound to be time when an ump in proper position gets a bad view of a play. When there are more umps, they can confer and usually come up with the correct call.

If you have 4 trained eyes seeing the same thing, a conference of them all will usually illicit the correct result.

It's also important to note that, although there is an Umpire-in-Chief, these conferences are not formal.

Imagine the Manny trap (I haven't seen the play at all, this is only for example), this could be a conversation;

2BU; I saw a catch
1BU; Yeah, me too.
HPU; Nope, definitely trapped it
3BU; Yeah, doubt any of us could tell
2BU; Alright, we'll overturn it.
1BU; Okay, Jesus, this game is going really long.
2BU; Yeah, [censored] Pitcher is throwing a lot of balls
3BU; Yeah, hey, Rick, did you hit that young Asian girl last night?

etc, etc. They come to a consensus really quickly, in most cases, and keep talking to make it look more legitimate.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

Baseball not using instant replay is retarded. The wildcard worked. Interleague play worked. Instant replay will work. [censored] being traditional; traditional sucks.

/rant

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Baseball not using instant replay is retarded. The wildcard worked. Interleague play worked. Instant replay will work. [censored] being traditional; traditional sucks.

/rant

[/ QUOTE ]

It would slow the games down too much.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Baseball not using instant replay is retarded. The wildcard worked. Interleague play worked. Instant replay will work. [censored] being traditional; traditional sucks.

/rant

[/ QUOTE ]

It would slow the games down too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, lets have the umps have little conferences and chat it up cause that's so much faster.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Baseball not using instant replay is retarded. The wildcard worked. Interleague play worked. Instant replay will work. [censored] being traditional; traditional sucks.

/rant

[/ QUOTE ]

It would slow the games down too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, lets have the umps have little conferences and chat it up cause that's so much faster.

[/ QUOTE ]

Instant reply would be used a lot more often than umpires confer with one another. At least, that's how I'd assume it would work.

However, I've always ignored conjecture about how it would work in MLB. Would it be an NFLesque system, or would umpires have the opportunity to use it if they think its necessary? Would there be a limit to how many times it is to be used, i.e. 4/game?

I suppose I'll google this.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Baseball not using instant replay is retarded. The wildcard worked. Interleague play worked. Instant replay will work. [censored] being traditional; traditional sucks.

/rant

[/ QUOTE ]

It would slow the games down too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, lets have the umps have little conferences and chat it up cause that's so much faster.

[/ QUOTE ]

Instant reply would be used a lot more often than umpires confer with one another. At least, that's how I'd assume it would work.

However, I've always ignored conjecture about how it would work in MLB. Would it be an NFLesque system, or would umpires have the opportunity to use it if they think its necessary? Would there be a limit to how many times it is to be used, i.e. 4/game?

I suppose I'll google this.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no instant replay in MLB so there are no rules. I'm sure there are plenty of different proposals thrown out there ranging from checking every pitch, to only checking homeruns.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

So what do you guys think is the right way to approach replay? Noting..A flag where he umps will review once a game? Umpires decision to review?? Etc..

This might work better as a pole but im drunk..

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

Both of these calls were very obvious. The 3B umpire was just an idiot apparently. I don't think any assistance from replay was needed.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

instant replay wouldn't slow things down much. this isn't football where you can stare at replays for five minutes and still have no idea what the correct call is. everything in baseball is out in the open, it's pretty rare that the correct call isn't clear after watching one replay

put a replay guy upstairs and let the umps call him on a walkie talkie at their discretion to ask him for the correct call on homerun/double fair/foul force out and tag out questions. they would use it maybe once every other game and it'd take probably two and a half minutes

that said, i dont really care either way. umps are really good at their jobs, i don't get angry at their (non ball/strike) calls very often

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

tiger - not sure what conspiracy you think is going on here.

When an umpire call is going to be overturned it's obviously going to be something that is likely to show up on instant-replay as well.

In the ATL/DET game today a run was scored by ATL that I think pretty clearly should have been an out because the runner's leg was high and wasn't touching the plate when he slid in. This was Tim McCarver's analysis as well.

No conference. No overturn. The run counted. Play continued.

If there were such communications taking place to overturn iffy ump-calls (wearing an earpiece or something?) I think we would see way more overturned calls.


In the past, it seemed that there were far fewer situations of overturned calls. The ump who made the call was on his own to stubbornly defend a bad call and it was considered an embarassment if he even considered asking another umpire. That's how it seemed to be sometimes anyway.

Now there is a much greater focus on overturning each other and just getting the call right.
If you are an ump in a different location but KNOW that you saw something that the ruling-ump couldn't possibly have seen then you can step right in and talk about it without having to wait to be asked. It's not considered an insult. Lets just get this right.
Just don't go out of your way to show me up over and over again obviously.


This is how I perceive the situation to be.

Basketball officials would be wise to consider a similar approach imo.
As it stands now, it seems that when two players have contact the foul call is made by whoever blows their whistle first.
Sometimes a guy who is furthest from the play makes a bad call that there was a foul when there was actually no contact.
My opnion is that if a ref in a better position could clearly see that there was no contact, or that the foul should have been called on the other player, then for crying out loud just suck it up, have an overrule, and get the call right.
Don't just stand by the call just because 1 guy was faster to blow his whistle than somebody else.

That's my take on it anyway but I understand so little about basketball officiating I wouldn't be surprised if I was 100% wrong in my perception on how such things work.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Baseball not using instant replay is retarded. The wildcard worked. Interleague play worked. Instant replay will work. [censored] being traditional; traditional sucks.

/rant

[/ QUOTE ]

The wild card is a joke and one step closer to rendering the regular season as meaningless as the NBA and NHL regular season.
Interleague has worked to the extent of helping a crappy NL team sell out a series against the Yankees.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The wild card is a joke

[/ QUOTE ]

Business wise the wild card has been a gold mine for MLB. Most will disagree with you by the way.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

meh if there were instant replay the 1985 World Series would have been far less fun

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

As long as it isn't ever used for balls/strikes, it definitely should be used.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

Replay could be implemented easily in baseball. Give each team one challenge per game (if they are right, they get a second). Can't be used for ball/strike calls and probably a couple other things. Unlike NFL, replays give a definitive answer 99% of the time in baseball. I believe it would actually save time as the umpires seem to confer for an excessively long time. Not to mention that it would greatly reduce the number of five minute tirades by coaches.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

Your detailed technical drawing notwithstanding, suppose the second base umpire has a better view of whether a pitch is inside or not--I imagine sometimes he does. Should he overrule the home plate umpire's decision. I imagine the 3rd or 1st base umpire has a better view of a tag play at home sometimes. Again, should that be overturned?

A manager can't argue balls and strikes. Why should he be able to argue "out" and "safe" calls, or fair and foul calls?

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your detailed technical drawing notwithstanding, suppose the second base umpire has a better view of whether a pitch is inside or not--I imagine sometimes he does. Should he overrule the home plate umpire's decision. I imagine the 3rd or 1st base umpire has a better view of a tag play at home sometimes. Again, should that be overturned?

A manager can't argue balls and strikes. Why should he be able to argue "out" and "safe" calls, or fair and foul calls?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just inane. Obscured views and bad angles happen in baseball, umpires should do what they can to counter-act it.

I'm not even going to illuminate, you're being stupid.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

In a Mets/Phillies game in NY, the umps initially ruled a homerun by Wright to be in play. He wound up on third. The scoreboard operator played a replay of the hit, which showed that it should have been a homerun. The umps then overturned the call.... Charlie Manuel was not happy, to say the least.

It's bad that replay is actually used in some situations, favoring the hometeam. It's going to take a screwed up playoff game for the owners/players to decide a new policy.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

I'm looking for consistency on what should happen in a given situation. When, exactly, can an umpire's call be overruled, and who is responsible for the overruling?

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm looking for consistency on what should happen in a given situation. When, exactly, can an umpire's call be overruled, and who is responsible for the overruling?

[/ QUOTE ]

For me, the best solution would be the umps themselves would only ask for a replay if they could not come to a consensus among those that saw the play what the right call is.

KJS

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

I'm pretty sure no umpire can overrule another umpire's call. The umpire who made the call has to change his mind. I know there have been instances watching games where my reflex led me to form an opinion on a call, but thinking back I thought I made a mistake. I think part of the reason umpires "confer" is to make it look good for when the first umpire just changes his mind.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...4/ai_n15658612

This tries to list calls that should be conferred on. However, it is really limited and there is a lot of grey area.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

plz to be using automated ball/strike calls and replay. Get it right, [censored] the rest.

Given that I'll never get the first one, just give me replay on everything but balls and strikes.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure no umpire can overrule another umpire's call.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is wrong. the example the guy used happened in the uc irvine vs i forget who game last week. The home plate ump overruled the first base ump. He did it immediately, before a conference.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
plz to be using automated ball/strike calls and replay. Get it right, [censored] the rest.

Given that I'll never get the first one, just give me replay on everything but balls and strikes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like the ambiguity of balls/strikes. Everything else should have replay.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure no umpire can overrule another umpire's call.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is wrong. the example the guy used happened in the uc irvine vs i forget who game last week. The home plate ump overruled the first base ump. He did it immediately, before a conference.

[/ QUOTE ]
Which umpire was supposed to make the call? I was under the impression that for basically every play, one umpire was supposed to make the call. For example: a ball that rolls foul in front of the 1st base bag is the responsibility of the home plate umpire and ball past the bag is the responsibility of the 1st base umpire.

If the responsibility is joint, I'm not sure you can call this overruling a call. Kind of like calling fouls in the NBA: 3 refs are watching the play and two don't see a foul but one does, the ref who sees it can call the foul.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

I'm pretty sure the home plate ump has authority over the rest of the crew.

Re: Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I like the ambiguity of balls/strikes. Everything else should have replay.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about those chops down the line that bounce just over the bag (or maybe a few inches outside of it) that no camera angle ever shows definitively- other than a hypothetical direct overhead shot or some kind of base-cam- and even the ump makes a blind guess on most of the time? Review the different angles of it endlessly? And then if it were deemed fair after being called foul on the field...double? Triple if it's a fast batter on a hit down the 1st base line? But what if Delmon Young is in right? Just give the batter second?

How about balks where a lefty brings his foot barely behind the rubber (maybe? angle again) before throwing to first? Check it every time?

The "neighborhood" swipe by middle infielders on double play balls? Not to mention I'm pretty sure Kevin Millar's foot comes off the bag a split-second early on about 25% of all routine groundouts. Enforce that stuff to the letter?

Check swings? Go to replay?

Bloop into short right field, runner on 1st thinks it will fall so heads to second, RF dives and comes up with it but ump rules it a trap, runner heads to third, RF overthrows third and runner scores. But replay shows it was a catch (which would have probably resulted in an easy DP). Again, where do you put the runner?

I can see replay to decide home runs, but that's about it.