Phil Wood: A postseason full of mistakes screams for baseball to expand replay
By: Phil Wood
Examiner Sports Columnist
October 25, 2009
Ideally, Major League baseball would love for every postseason to have a "moment," a play or a key hit or home run that will be replayed endlessly for years to come.
This year's postseason highlight film is, so far anyway, dominated by some of the worst umpiring decisions -- all over the field -- that we've ever seen. From Phil Cuzzi's dyslexic look at the left-field line in the Yankees-Twins series, to Tim McClelland and Dale Scott's multiple mistakes in the Yankees-Angels tilt
Admittedly, I'm a little late to the party on this topic, but my spin is a little different.
Baseball adopted instant replay this decade as a way to decide boundary calls on home runs. Did the ball leave the field in fair or foul territory? Did it actually clear the fence? Beyond that, it has no application.
Yet, it does, and has, for many years.
I was an official scorer for the American League for 5 seasons in the 1990's. When my appointment letter arrived each offseason, it included a list of advisories. One of those nuggets was the suggestion to use instant replay. The letter basically said that if a scorer has access to replay in the press box to, by all means, use it, because of the importance to "get those calls right."
If the sport is so concerned about accurately recording the numbers each game generates and "getting it right," why then should replay not be used on more than just boundary calls? Commissioner Selig has stated his objection to extensive use of replay because he feels it would slow the pace of the game.
He's correct in that the pace of the game might be hindered, but that's assuming that: One, every game would require multiple replay decisions; and two, the crew on the field would have to go back down the runway to view the replays on a monitor.
However, if a fifth umpire was positioned on the broadcast level, he could view the available angles and make the call from there. It doesn't have to be a group decision.
As for speeding up the pace of the game, if Selig and his lieutenants were really serious about that, they'd direct the umpire's union to get their members to start calling rule 2.00 the way it's defined in the rule book: "The strike zone is defined as that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the kneecap. The strike zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball."
If you'd like to see what it really means, check out some of the old games they show on the MLB Network.
This just doesn't seem to be an insurmountable problem.
Phil Wood is a contributor to Nats Xtra on MASN. Contact him at philwood@washingtonexaminer.com.
More from Phil Wood
- Phil Wood: Expect the Nationals to improve, not perform miracles, in 2010
- Phil Wood: It's time for the Nationals to take the interim tag off Riggleman
- Phil Wood: Late postseason broadcasts alienate younger fans
- Phil Wood: A postseason full of mistakes screams for baseball to expand replay
- Phil Wood » Nats GM Mike Rizzo determined to put his own stamp on the team
