Does Mlb Need To Expand Replay?

[Bubble Screen]

They should just give a challenge to each manager. They can't review every little thing, or the games would never end. No challenging balls and strikes. But ix is right, you should be able to review a play like the one that cost the Tigers pitcher the perfect game, and the play that cost the Braves in the playoffs last year.

[CRobi21]

FP brought up a good point on the Nats broadcast. Are you going to see challenges over "in the area" plays at 2nd base on double plays? If so then get ready for more injuries on these plays because infielders won't be able to get out of the way.

If its late in a game and managers have challenges to burn, they're just going to use them- frequently. There's nothing that I've read to penalize them for getting one wrong, like the loss of a timeout in football. This will fundamentally change the game. TERRIBLE execution on this idea, and I hope it fails when it comes to vote.

 

Yea. I don't know why all sports that have replay/reviews don't adopt the college football system. They have the office up in the pressbox with three guys that review all the replays. The head ref communicates directly from the field to that office. It's nice and smooth, and doesn't break up the games that bad. 

 

Best way to do it.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Wish this was a multi-choice poll and included NO REPLAY AT ALL. Idk, I'm a baseball purist. Ump **** ups and working them has been part of the game for 150 years. I can live with them. It all evens out in the end.

That said, I can live with replay reviews. It's not like the DH where it'll be a complete ****ization and mockery of the game.

Edit: funny, thinking about it, I think the one thing I might like is some type of automatic strike zone system where balls and strikes are called by a computer. And that's the one thing they're not doing. One the flipside of that, I can see how that could take away some of the brilliance from guys like Maddux who would work the very limits of the strike zone (and the ump) all game. I can see how a system like that could take away a TON from the game.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Everything but balls and strikes, only because if you include balls and strikes the game would never end. There are too many blown calls that affect too many games all because the umpire didn't have the correct angle to see if contact was made.

Like one poster wrote, let balls and strikes be counted by pitchtrax, it is, or can be made to be infinitely more accurate than the human eye. That said I know that won't happen in my lifetime because apparently there is some sort of nostalgia in baseball around allowing human error to screw up a game.

At least in football we have the chain, and review to check the first down and the spotting of the ball. Humans are fallible and we shouldn't be embracing human failure as part of an acceptable nostalgia.

[Koolblue13]

Baseball is the one sport you can completely remove human errors from the officiating and they should

[Sticksboi05]

Yea. I don't know why all sports that have replay/reviews don't adopt the college football system. They have the office up in the pressbox with three guys that review all the replays. The head ref communicates directly from the field to that office. It's nice and smooth, and doesn't break up the games that bad. 

 

Best way to do it.

 

That or the NHL which reviews all scoring plays in the central office in Toronto.

Wish this was a multi-choice poll and included NO REPLAY AT ALL. Idk, I'm a baseball purist. Ump **** ups and working them has been part of the game for 150 years. I can live with them. It all evens out in the end.

That said, I can live with replay reviews. It's not like the DH where it'll be a complete ****ization and mockery of the game.

Edit: funny, thinking about it, I think the one thing I might like is some type of automatic strike zone system where balls and strikes are called by a computer. And that's the one thing they're not doing. One the flipside of that, I can see how that could take away some of the brilliance from guys like Maddux who would work the very limits of the strike zone (and the ump) all game. I can see how a system like that could take away a TON from the game.

 

I'm a football purist and we should go back to leather helmets.

[TheGoodBits]

I'm a football purist and we should go back to leather helmets.

Not sure if that's sarcasm but there would be fewer concussions with thin leather helmets (or no helmet).

Would completely change the game, but still.

[artmonkforHOF]

Balls & strikes would slow the game down way too much. MLB is a joke with replays, even in stadiums they do not show controversial calls by order from MLB head office.

Everything else should be reveiwable because you can pretty much get a good angle anywhere on the field, if there is no good angle, call stands.

I think the Braves GM said without B&S's, 89% of calls would be reviewable. I think the other 11% is situations where you can't determine the outcome even with replay.

Example: bases loaded, no out, short fly to right, RF sticks glove out to make a shoestring catch, runners hold close, called a catch, runner at 3rd tags but is thrown out at home, other runners stay put. Replay shows ball bounced into glove, should be a hit. Where do you put the runners? Would you call 3rd safe at home assuming he would have made it had he not tagged the base first? Bases loaded 1 out? Bases loaded 1 run? The point is, you have no idea what would have happened had the correct call been made. Which would suck if true, because those are the types of plays that can decide ballgames.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Balls & strikes would slow the game down way too much.

That's why it shouldn't be replay, but pitchtrax, if you watch baseball on tv you see the pitchtrax on every pitch, it is a matter of a computer program to light up strikes and balls on the score board from the pitchtrax. I have never understood why baseball "purists" are so utterly infatuated with the accuracy of stats and embrace the total ambiguity of a strike zone that can change from one umpire to the next, one game to the next. Not to mention when they actually blow it, especially from football fans who embrace the fact that our game is a game of inches and we fight tooth and nail about whether a toe was out of bounds.

[Bubble Screen]

You absolutely can not use Pitchtrax for balls and strikes. That's going too far. And MLB has to be careful about expanding replay. The games are already long enough. You don't want to start turning 3 hour games into 3:30 ones.

[DCSaints_fan]

Everything except balls and strikes.   I like the challenge system like the NFL other have proposed.   To prevent the "burn unused challenges at the end of the game" problem, I would do something similiar to the NFL; after the 7th inning, challenges would have to be initiated by the booth.   I don't think managers want to slow the game down uncessarily any more than fans do, so I don't think they would use their challenges unless they had a good reason.

 

I'm not sure I'm on board with using pitchtrax for balls and strikes.   Pitchers and batters dealing with the ump's strike zone is always a part of the game; bad calls aren't, necessarily   That is, in a given game the umps could get all the base/tag calls correct, but in every game you always have a "fuzzy" strike zone. 

[Destino]

Every sport needs a ref that is not on the field that is entirely trusted to handle the replays.  We don't need refs walking to the sidelines and going to monitors to personally review everything and wasting time.  We need a guy sitting next to some monitors with a cup of coffee and a firm understanding of the rule book.  

[TheDoyler23]

I like expanding replay. I like having an off the field official being the one taking a look. I HATE the 'coaches challenge' aspect, especially with the, though x amount of innings, you get one and then in the late innings, blah blah blah. Lame.

 

Just get the calls right and do it quickly. 

[Sticksboi05]

The challenge system sucks, no arguments there.