One last thing on instant replay

by Travis G on Nov 18, 2009 11:00 AM EST in Analysis Comment 20 comments

I know we discussed it ad nauseum during the playoffs, but I have to mention one last thing about video review (probably the last time before next season).

Instant replay/replay review/video review, whatever you want to call it, it's been a success. It's been around for a little more than a season (beginning in September of 2008), and has only been used for disputed homeruns. Of 65 disputed calls since then, 22 have been overturned (34%)*. 34% may not seem like much, but it is. Homeruns can completely change a game. To think that umpires have been blowing a third of (disputed) homerun calls in the past is disturbing.

Unfortunately, general managers didn't have enough poor umpiring in the playoffs, so video review will remain limited to homeruns next year. If Tim McClelland's atrocious non-call in the ALCS wasn't bad enough, I shudder to think what kind of call will motivate expanded video review.

* source: The 2010 Bill James Handbook

0 recs | Comment 20 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I agree but...

be careful with your stats, the umpires blew 34 percent of the 65 calls they reviewed. There were 4655 hr’s this year and 22 hr’s overturned, that’s .4%, meaning 1 in every 200 calls (approx.) was overturned. I have a feeling other calls will have a higher percentage.

by charlievona on Nov 18, 2009 11:08 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

true

i just realized now that it might sound like a third of ALL homers are wrong. but yes, it’s a third of disputed HR calls. i changed it.

by Travis G on Nov 18, 2009 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

To think that umpires have been blowing a third of homerun calls in the past is disturbing.

A third of fair/foul home run calls.

That’s still terrible though. You’re right though, home runs are HUGE. 22 home runs probably equal 30-40 runs given an average distribution of runners on base.

Think about every close pennant race in years past that was decided by a game. If even limited instant replay like this was available, things could have turned out very differently

by 3460kuri on Nov 18, 2009 11:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't get why they'd not do it

The technology is there. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out a way to do it quickly and efficiently. Why not do it? It doesn’t make sense for umpires to be against it. There’s going to be instant replay shown on TV whether there’s an actual re-play rule or not, so if they blow a call they’ll be ridiculed regardless. Why not at least get the call right in the process?

by Let's Talk About Tex Baby on Nov 18, 2009 12:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Simple solution...

…robot umpires.

These games are life and death matters, and the decisions made on the field are critical to our survival as human beings.

by New York Sports Jerk on Nov 18, 2009 12:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

In 2011 Will Smith and Arnold Schwarzenegger will be needed

to make a film about taking the game back when these robot umpires become aware and take control of the league.

This sticker is dangerous and inconvenient, but I do love Fig Newtons.

by Lord Duggan on Nov 18, 2009 10:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

!!!!

"It ain't over till its over"---

by FreeBradshaw on Nov 19, 2009 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

BYAH!

This sticker is dangerous and inconvenient, but I do love Fig Newtons.

by Lord Duggan on Nov 19, 2009 2:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

As long as Miles Dyson is dead...

…I think we’ll be okay.

by New York Sports Jerk on Nov 19, 2009 4:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

This sticker is dangerous and inconvenient, but I do love Fig Newtons.

by Lord Duggan on Nov 20, 2009 2:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wrong wrong wrong

A third of REVIEWED calls were wrong. That does not imply that a third of all calls are wrong.

We are statistically uninformed as a nation. Maybe as a race.

"You don't realize how easy this game is until you get up in that broadcasting booth." Mickey

by Cbeck3 on Nov 18, 2009 12:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't think that's true

Five people posted, and three pointed out the mistake. That means 60% of the population understands statistics well enough to notice the error.

by long time listener on Nov 18, 2009 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not Quite

I don’t think we have any basis to assume the posters to this thread are representative of the population at large

by NYYankeeDude on Nov 18, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

True statement

But 60% of the people who matter (those who post regularly on Pinstripe Alley) are smart enough to understand.
That’s good enough for me.

"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."

by jscape2000 on Nov 18, 2009 3:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not that any of it matters

because 80% of the time we’re all half wrong anyway.

by Jaybat on Nov 18, 2009 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

"They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time."

by Scooby Snacks on Nov 18, 2009 11:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He misspoke. Don't get all high and mighty.

Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.

by CasanovaWong on Nov 18, 2009 2:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Right.

He probably meant a third of close calls or non-obvious calls. Since you’d expect a coin to get those right 50% of the time, 34% is pretty bad. Even if it’s only .4% of all HR calls.

by metric on Nov 18, 2009 3:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't get this at all

why would they NOT use instant replay. They have the ability to do it. How much could it possibly slow down the game? And isn’t it worth it to get the calls right? Replay should be expanded to everything except Balls and strikes.

Getting the calls right is very important. The human element should still be in the game, but it can’t affect a game too much because an umpire makes awful calls. It’s not fair.

But Selig is NEVER expanding instant replay for reasons best known to himself, so I don’t think there’s a point in discussing it. It’s going to take a call that costs a team a championship for them to change the rule.

by nyyrocks29 on Nov 18, 2009 4:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The reasons best known to Bud Selig are RATINGS RATINGS and RATINGS

Let’s play the World Series of a summer sport at 8 PM on the east coast in November. Let’s schedule 39 off-days in the playoffs when the game is normally played just about every day.

This sticker is dangerous and inconvenient, but I do love Fig Newtons.

by Lord Duggan on Nov 18, 2009 10:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs