Are baseball umpires getting help from the booth?

[dw2006]

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.

[gehrig]

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

[MicroBob]

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.

[mo42nyy]

[ 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.

[Uglyowl]

[ 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.

[disjunction]

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

[SL__72]

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

[Homer]

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.

[andyfox]

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?

[lippy]

[ 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.