What is the purpose of having replay?

[Grant77]

They say that this is supposed to make baseball fairer for all teams, but I'm not seeing it. If it's going to continue to be used as a tool to further MLB's agenda then I'd rather not have it at all.

 

On a play as conclusive as the Pillar hit, the explanation that they 'thought he was out' isn't acceptable. They have the angle that shows Pillar's foot on the base and the ball not in the glove, it's not like this is up for debate. What gives?

[Abomination]

They say that this is supposed to make baseball fairer for all teams, but I'm not seeing it. If it's going to continue to be used as a tool to further MLB's agenda then I'd rather not have it at all.

 

On a play as conclusive as the Pillar hit, the explanation that they 'thought he was out' isn't acceptable. They have the angle that shows Pillar's foot on the base and the ball not in the glove, it's not like this is up for debate. What gives?

 

I think you're the only person who didn't think it was a tie. It most certainly was not conclusive, nor was the explanation that they 'thought he was out'. The official ruling was no conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field.

 

The idea is to remove egregious mistakes by the umps, not to be used to challenge the kinds of plays we usually see it on at 1st and 2nd.

[Jonn]

It was created to find new ways to f*** over the Blue Jays.

[Grant77]

I think you're the only person who didn't think it was a tie. It most certainly was not conclusive, nor was the explanation that they 'thought he was out'. The official ruling was no conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field.

 

The idea is to remove egregious mistakes by the umps, not to be used to challenge the kinds of plays we usually see it on at 1st and 2nd.

 

You obviously didn't see the angle where Pillar's foot was on the base and the ball wasn't in the glove yet, so I'll allow you time to realize your mistake before commenting further. If you're going to be an obstinate jackass about it and insist that you're right then don't bother.

 

I made this thread to discuss the faults in replay and not to debate a clear and conclusive call.

[Candy Maldonado]

You obviously didn't see the angle where Pillar's foot was on the base and the ball wasn't in the glove yet, so I'll allow you time to realize your mistake before commenting further.

 

I made this thread to discuss the faults in replay and not to debate a clear and conclusive call.

 

lol

[Krylian]

Replay is a good thing. 99.9% of the time the right call is made.

[07collian]

I was fine with the call and I think its a good thing if it enables them to make the right call more often, as long as it doesn't waste too much time.

[Grant77]

Replay is a good thing. 99.9% of the time the right call is made.

 

That's horseshit. The incorrect call is upheld on a regular basis.

 

A correct call is not overturned 99.9% of the time perhaps.

[Abomination]

You obviously didn't see the angle where Pillar's foot was on the base and the ball wasn't in the glove yet, so I'll allow you time to realize your mistake before commenting further. If you're going to be an obstinate jackass about it and insist that you're right then don't bother.

 

I made this thread to discuss the faults in replay and not to debate a clear and conclusive call.

 

I'm not sure what I did to piss you off, as nothing I said was a personal attack (you're the only one who has done that). I think at this point it's clear you didn't make this thread to discuss anything, as you attack every attempt people have made so far. Feel free to whine to your heart's content, while the rest of us actually enjoy the game.

[Grant77]

I'm not sure what I did to piss you off, as nothing I said was a personal attack (you're the only one who has done that). I think at this point it's clear you didn't make this thread to discuss anything, as you attack every attempt people have made so far. Feel free to whine to your heart's content, while the rest of us actually enjoy the game.

 

I'm not seeing a personal attack other than a hypothetical statement that may or may not apply to you.

 

There is no discussion to be had on the Pillar play. Hr's conclusively safe, period.

 

There is a discussion to be had about replay and how it can be improved. Umpires can't differentiate split second calls like that so why are their calls given such extreme weight? It doesn't make the game any fairer. It serves as a tool to justify their incorrect calls and possibly more.

[reedjohnsonfan]

Where did the replay show he was safe? I thought he was clearly out if anything.

[Krylian]

That's horseshit. The incorrect call is upheld on a regular basis.

 

A correct call is not overturned 99.9% of the time perhaps.

 

I disagree. You're just mad and are lashing out.

 

It's very rare that a blatant call is upheld. Are there borderline calls that don't get overturned? Of course... But you can't change something if it's not clear one way or the other.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Krylian

[canadiansportsjunkie]

He was out...slow down your drinking...it takes time to be a pro

[Boxcar]

what are you guys doing

[Boxcar]

how many times does Grant need to do this before you realize that Grant just wants his opinion validated and nothing more?

 

Amazing how he still gets bites. Maybe some people get a thrill out of it?

[Grant77]

I disagree. You're just mad and are lashing out.

 

It's very rare that a blatant call is upheld. Are there borderline caps that don't get overturned? Of course... But you can't change something if it's not clear one way or the other.

 

Our definition of rare obviously differs significantly, but arguing semantics never led anywhere productive.

 

The point remains that umpire calls shouldn't have any relevance in instances where there is a definitive camera angle.

 

If the correct call is made on the field for the Pillar play, does anyone think they overturn it? If the answer is no, then there is no point to the replay at all. We're just ignoring the extra information and reverting back to the original call that isn't humanly possible to make with any certainty.

 

Make the correct call in those instances, period. The umpires should only be used on a tag play without a definitive angle.

[candymartinez]

What a s*** post.

That Pillar play was incredibly close. You really can't get mad either way.

[Laika]

Replay just shows how deep some people's bias runs. You can show someone a play with an objective call in super slo-mo, and they'll still see whatever the heck they want to see.

[Laika]

The only thing I don't like about replay, aside from the implementation (time it takes), is how runners are expected to "stick" to bases with superhuman ability. It's just kind of silly and unrealistic.

[John_Havok]

The answer is still incredibly simple, when it goes to replay, the replay officials simply review the play and make the call as to what they see, completely ignoring what the umpires call was.

 

If its definitive, they make the call. If its inconclusive, the call goes to the offense.

 

Ignoring the call on the field eliminates this issue. It will never happen, but that's the solution. And secondly, have a the umpire make a quick clarification announcement like the refs in football or hockey do.

[Grant77]

The answer is still incredibly simple, when it goes to replay, the replay officials simply review the play and make the call as to what they see, completely ignoring what the umpires call was.

 

If its definitive, they make the call. If its inconclusive, the call goes to the offense.

 

Ignoring the call on the field eliminates this issue. It will never happen, but that's the solution. And secondly, have a the umpire make a quick clarification announcement like the refs in football or hockey do.

 

Thank you for the thoughtful post. I agree.

 

The explanation message is a fantastic idea. At least you could figure out what they are thinking on like Pillar that defies explanation from TV only. Sometimes it's so obvious that you figure there must be something you're missing.

[Grant77]

Replay just shows how deep some people's bias runs. You can show someone a play with an objective call in super slo-mo, and they'll still see whatever the heck they want to see.

 

Let's not lose sight of the fact that one of the 30 best replay rooms in the world also saw the definitive evidence that Pillar was safe. If this was on Sportsnet and they had paused it at the critical moment, you wouldn't be making such an uninformed statement. You've shown that you think you are superior to everyone, but I'm perfectly capable of seeing his foot on the base and the ball not in the glove on a paused screen even with the hindsight that it meant f*** all.

[Laika]

Grant you can lick me where I fart

[Atothe]

Is this really about the pillar play? He was out!

[admin]

14 year old rage post

[Grant77]

Grant you can lick me where I fart

 

Typical response when you're wrong, not surprised.

[Daniel Labude]

They say that this is supposed to make baseball fairer for all teams, but I'm not seeing it. If it's going to continue to be used as a tool to further MLB's agenda then I'd rather not have it at all.

 

On a play as conclusive as the Pillar hit, the explanation that they 'thought he was out' isn't acceptable. They have the angle that shows Pillar's foot on the base and the ball not in the glove, it's not like this is up for debate. What gives?

 

The only thing wrong with replay is most of the time they go in not wanting to overturn the umpires call. Today they got all the replay decisions correct. Maybe at some point they can just let the replay make the call and not base it off the field. Other than that it's fine.

[Spanky99]

You obviously didn't see the angle where Pillar's foot was on the base and the ball wasn't in the glove yet, so I'll allow you time to realize your mistake before commenting further. If you're going to be an obstinate jackass about it and insist that you're right then don't bother.

 

I made this thread to discuss the faults in replay and not to debate a clear and conclusive call.

 

Lmfao...

[Spanky99]

I'm not seeing a personal attack other than a hypothetical statement that may or may not apply to you.

 

There is no discussion to be had on the Pillar play. Hr's conclusively safe, period.

 

There is a discussion to be had about replay and how it can be improved. Umpires can't differentiate split second calls like that so why are their calls given such extreme weight? It doesn't make the game any fairer. It serves as a tool to justify their incorrect calls and possibly more.

 

Admit it Grant, you just got rekt!

[Spanky99]

Our definition of rare obviously differs significantly, but arguing semantics never led anywhere productive.

 

The point remains that umpire calls shouldn't have any relevance in instances where there is a definitive camera angle.

 

If the correct call is made on the field for the Pillar play, does anyone think they overturn it? If the answer is no, then there is no point to the replay at all. We're just ignoring the extra information and reverting back to the original call that isn't humanly possible to make with any certainty.

Make the correct call in those instances, period. The umpires should only be used on a tag play without a definitive angle.

 

So why have challenges on a call is what you're saying? Meh, they're working on it, and we all know it, this thread was unnecessary.