Re: Series
 

I can't see why the umpire's union would object to a 7th umpire selected just for replays (or put him in the rotation, so each ump covers one position during a 7-game series).

Yes.
 

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/i...co_caveman.jpg

That's about right.

TM

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

Deadspin











My God. It's full of stars.

Re: Series
 

I'm not saying that using replay to correct calls isn't doable. And I'd like to see it for certains types of calls. But the two bad calls last night illustrate that bad calls can sometimes be difficult to remedy. Once a bad call is made, the players rely on that call and subsequent actions are affected.

Utley was safe at first. And that call was easy to remedy: place Utley on first base and Rollins on third. The action was done at that point and the players did not rely on the ump's missed call to make any further decisions.

But how to remedy a non-catch like the one by Howard? Does the first base ump yelling "out" affect Howard's decision making? It didn't play out this way* last night, but what if Howard had heard the ump call "out" and simply stepped on first base for the double play? How do you remedy that bad call considering that if the ump had not called "out" Howard would have thrown to second to try and turn the double play? The ump's call affects Howard's subsequent action.

*Two reasons for Howard stepping toward first but then throwing to second last night:
1) He knew he trapped it and didn't hear the ump, thought for a second about getting the easy out at first base but then realized he should try to turn two; or
2) He wasn't sure if he trapped it or not and simply got confused after hearing the ump call "out".

Edited for embarassing typos.

Re: Yes.
 

Close. But I'm pretty sure I nailed it last season when I figured out that he is:

http://theroadshowversion.files.word...3/sweetums.jpg

(Interestingly, he also looks a lot like a giant version of a close friend of ours in Dallas. I don't really think that our friend resembles Sweetums, but he also doesn't flap his bottom lip around the way Gasol does.)

Re: Series
 

You have a point. But that's only an issue for the ump if the player actually relied on the ump's call. Clearly Howard knew he trapped it and his actions were completely unaffected by the bad call. He threw to second to try to start a double play and fucked up. Easy call for the umps to make in overturning. Everyone is safe, bases loaded, one out.

Ridiculous. He knew he trapped it and threw to second. Players don't mistakenly think they have caught a ball on the fly that they've trapped. Doesn't happen.

TM

Re: Series
 

Imagine how long a baseball game would last if there was a review booth. I'm not saying that using technology to make sure that the play is called correctly would be wrong, but the last thing that baseball needs is something to slow down the game.

Re: Series
 

There are ways to cut the length of games, including things already in the rule book--larger strike zone, time limits on pitches, keeping batters in the batter's box.

Plus, perhaps a limit on warm-up pitches on in-inning pitching changes. If the reliever is getting loose in the bullpen, why does he need 8 more pitches? How about 3, to get his footing? (aside from the injury situation).

Re: Series
 

I agree. They should change the rules to keep the game moving. Make it so that batters can't call timeout once a pitcher is in his wind-up. Limit the number of mound visits per inning. They should also reduce the amount of time between each pitch.

But when it comes to reviewing a bad call, if it's not obvious enough for the reviewing ump to overturn the call after watching one or two replays, the call on the field should stand. And the reviewing up should review the play on his own. Baseball doesn't need football-level review. It only needs a mechanism to overturn the most blatantly stupid calls.

TM

Re: Series
 

What about the fair ball called foul against the twins? While in some situations you may be able to rely on what occurred, baseball seems likely to have more situations like the Cutler fumble/incompletion last year that led to the review rule change in the NFL.

Re: Series
 

As it would have been a ground rule double, that one actually is pretty easy. But it would have been difficult if the ball had not bounced into the stands.

Re: Series
 

Fair enough on the specifics, but it's quite easy to imagine it hits the wall, and also that there are runners on base already so that it matters whether the double is "ground rule" or allows runners to advance 3 bases.

Re: Series
 

I don't understand your question. It seems pretty simple to me. If the ump mistakenly calls a ball that would end up being a ground rule double a foul ball, runner gets second base. I'm not sure we want to get into having umps decide whether or not a runner could have made it to second (or even third) if the ball remained in play. If the call can be corrected, correct it. If it can't, it can't.

TM

Re: Series
 

I never liked the fact that the umps got to use their discretion to decide those calls even on current ground rule doubles. In any situation, if you're going to say that it was clear the batter would have gotten at least a double but for the bad call, make it a ground rule double and everyone moves up two bases. That's it. I don't care if the runner was moving with the pitch or if you have Usain Bolt on first. Two bases.

TM

Re: Series
 

They do? I can't ever recall seeing a runner allowed to score on a ground-rule double. I might provide discretion for fan-interference doubles, however. And that's from a fan of a team whose fans are probably best positioned physically and knowledge-wise as to when to pick up (or let go) a ball in play along the stands.