2008 MLB Thread (1 Viewer)

[Mike Frezon]

Instant Replay used for first time in MLB.

A video is embedded from the YES network showing how the whole thing played out.

Funny that it happened to be an A-Rod homer that evoked first usage of the new rule.

 

[Jason Seaver]

I don't know that it's particularly funny - the guy hits a bunch of homers. Of course, his was one of the botched ones that helped spur the move to replay.

I noticed after Tuesday's dismantling of the Orioles, which included a pretty awful botched call in the Red Sox's favor, Jim Rice endorsed using replay for more than home run calls to get that sort of tag call right.

Still a ways off from my idea of a transponder in the center of every ball so that its path can be tracked from pitcher to strike zone to field of play in real time, though.

 

[Mike Frezon]

You are kidding...right?!

==================

From what I saw of the incident involving the invoking of the rule on the YES network and SportsCenter's coverage, I really don't think the replays could give you a definitive answer on the fair/foul call. But I certainly don't know what the umpires saw.

Some comments made after the game by the crew chief (aired by ESPN) were exceptionally vague. He talked about how they were sure of the call on the field but only decided to make the review based on Madden's argument and because the technology was available. Nowhere--in what I saw--did he say the video evidence factored into their decision-making.

If you didn't see it, the HR was an absolute bomb that sailed OVER the foul pole and hit a catwalk-of-sorts behind the pole at Tropicana Field and bounced back into the field of play. It's one of those odd things where a foul line is then painted on the wall above the foul pole on the back wall which follows the line-of-sight from home plate. It was very difficult to tell--based on the camera angles--if where the ball hit was to the right of that imaginary left field foul line.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Here are the quotes I referenced above...from SI.com:

 

[LewB]

When I watched the replay on YES, I said 'Holy Crap it went OVER the pole'

Did you happen to see the bomb that Nady clubbed the night before ? I swear that if Tropicana Field didn't have a roof, that ball would have left the park. It even sounded different when he hit it.

 

[Mike Frezon]

And don't think I don't appreciate the Yankee firepower showing up during this series with the Rays!

 

[Jason Seaver]

If this is going to be the main use for replay, it would make a lot of sense for the teams to install dedicated, non-movable cameras that point straight down the foul lines. Superimpose a line on the playback to make it really clear.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Jason...you scare me.

 

[TonyD]

forget about home run replays for second.

isnt it about time the televised sports adds or changes some of the camera angles?
baseball included.
at least on philly tv it is the same tired camera angles and shots for every single pitch and hit.

between every single pitch we get a close up of the batter upper torso.
on the phils when ryan howard hits we also get the close up of him spitting on his hands and slapping it together every pitch.

the same behind the plate camera on every ball that's hit.
the same camera angle for the behind the pitcher over
his shoulder shot.
yawn.

when will we have a shot with a camera behind home plate that is right on the line on each side aiming right at the foul pole.
how about a camera on the other side of the pitchers shoulder.

the Cards have a camera right behind the pitcher in dead center.
this is perfect, you can actually see were the ball crosses the plate.

a couple years ago the phils had a camera on a pole right behind first
base that could rise and lower up to about 30 feet or so.
were did that go?

other sports too, but that is another topic.

I just want some new camera angles.

oh i forgot. has anyone seen the behind the plate shot at the Nationals park?
It looks like it's being shot from a blimp above the stadium, ridiculous.
It reminds me of those old shots in the astrodome that was on the roof right above the plate.

 

[Walter C]

Like anything else in sports, we will praise replay when it runs in our favor, and hate it when it doesn't.

 

[Steve_Tk]

Why haven't they mounted cameras on the bottom of the foul poles looking up already? That way you can see the ball pass the pole and know exactly what side of the pole it's on?

I also don't knwo why more parks do not have the camera directly behind the pitcher. I hate the angle from behind the pitcher because you can't really tell if the ball hugged the edge of the plate or not.

 

[Jason Seaver]

I think the lack of cameras directly behind the pitcher has been because that would mean putting it right in center field and messing up the "hitter's backdrop". NESN has been using a camera there this year, and while I like it, a bunch of people don't. But, it's baseball and a bunch of people (coughcoughMikecough) fear anything that changes it from how it was when they were younger.

It's not perfect - it's a higher angle than usual and because it's remotely controlled, it's not as instantly responsive as the one with a guy who can instinctively swing it around to follow the ball. As to why we don't see other angles, every spot you put a camera emplacement could also be used for paying customers. I'm personally shocked how many camera positions they manage to cram into a 96-year-old ballpark, and I suspect that what we see out of Yankee Stadium 3.0 will be pretty amazing - YES is pretty well-regarded in terms of how technically well-produced their games are and they're getting a new park built for the 21st century.

It boggles my mind why people would be scared of ideas like that, unless they were in the umps' union. Have you ever left a game excited that you won because the umpire screwed up? That's a pretty hollow-feeling victory. Wouldn't you like it if the rulebook strike zone was called fairly and impartially, not "maybe a rookie doesn't get that call, but Greg Maddux has earned it"? And that's before you get the cool 3-D graphics tracing a knuckleball's path, a "Tale of the Tape" accurate to the inch or being able to extrapolate how far a home run would have traveled if it didn't hit the signs over the Monster.

I mean, it's not like I'm asking for sensors to be implanted in every glove and base to tell definitively which impact happened first...

 

[Mike Frezon]

Well...I know I'm not a member of the umpire's union--just a baseball fan.

I don't think these people are umpires either:

https://secure.nypost.com/seven/0616...676.htm?page=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/we...se&oref=slogin

AN INSTANT FIX FOR BASEBALL - New York Post

America's proud moment

PLAY BALL, SELL BEER - New York Post

 

[Scott_J]

Phils/Cubs. 7th inning, 2 out, 2-2 game. Runners at 1st and 3rd. Ryan Howard hit a ball to short, I believe. The replay showed he clearly beat the throw but was called out. Phils would have been up 3-2, with a chance to score more. Instead, Soriano hit a home run in the bottom of the inning to make it 3-2 Cubs, which ended up being the final score.

Next day, same teams. Fukudome was called safe at first on an infield single, but the replay showed he was actually out.

I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

 

[MarkHastings]

I love that camera! The only thing that bugs me is the shakiness of it...on a big screen, it's almost nauseating.

It always amazes me how many fans boo when they think that an ump has made an incorrect call on a pitch, when NO ONE at the park is viewing from the right angle (other than the people directly behind home plate).


Mike, I still don't agree with those articles. Every other sport hasn't lost it's 'soul' because of the use of instant replay. It seems like the only reason against it is due to our perception of baseball being the "national pastime"...that the use of this technology somehow cheapens the spirit.

Well, the game isn't the same game that it used to be. What about the advertisements all over the parks? What about parks being sponsored by corporations? What about players earning more per game than players used to make all season? What about......

Face it, the game isn't the same anymore. If you're on the side of the "Traditionalists", then I don't see how instant replay can cheapen the game anymore than it already has. Those original team mates would be disgusted as to what has become of the game. The only reason people don't mind about the way the game has evolved is because the changes occurred slowly; unlike replay which happened overnight. I just don't see how this is such a big deal.

No offense, but those articles sound a lot like the old man who refuses to use a computer for his business because he used to get by without one 'back in the day'.


As to the point about the use of the replay on A-Rods homer only being called because the technology was there, I wish there was a way (like in football) where the opposition could challenge a call, but be penalized if the call was actually correct.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Well, I guess I just don't see it the same way Mark. For one, ballparks have had advertising for longer than I can remember. That's nothing new. Here's Crosley Field in 1956:



Note the Bavarian old Style Beer sign prominently displayed in left field. Crosley also had the famous Seibler Suit sign. "Hit this sign and get a suit!" I cannot think of Utz Potato Chips without thinking of Yankee Stadium, etc.

Heck, I don't even like all the patches and junk that is now starting to show up on player's uniforms. There was actually advertising(!) on the unis worn when the Sox & As opened in Japan this year. And don't get me started on playing regular season games outside the US & Canada.

============

But, anyway, just because there have been changes to the "game" doesn't mean there have been many changes to the actual game of baseball--played on the field--itself. The game itself has changed very little since the early 1900s. Nine guys per team on a field on which the bases are 90 feet apart with a ball that's 9" around and 5 oz. in wight.

Have there been changes? Sure. Some of them dramatic. The DH probably the most so.

But that doesn't mean that all change is necessary...or even inevitable.

If you reallly feel the game has been cheapened by some of the changes already made to it, why would you support more?

And I don't know bout others, but I don't like many of the changes made to the game even if they did happen across a long period of time such as you posit.

The reserve clause, big money, corporate ownership are all things which have changed the face of the game. But they have all happened off-the-field.

Uniforms, equipment, the fields themselves, the men who play a boy's game, the umpires and the rulebook in their backpockets...are all still pretty much the same as they were when Connie Mack was presiding over the Athletics.

Replay is a change in the way the game is played on-the-field. To me, it is unnecessary and does not need to be embraced as inevitable. And, most importantly, it is a cracked-open door which will open to a very slippery slope as already seen by those who are calling for replay to be added on to a slew of other calls on the field.

And, of course, I don't think that the addition of replay--such as in the A-Rod scenario from last night--guarantees accuracy any more than the umpires' eyes. I've seen way too many replays of one play from different angles which seem to contradict another.

I'm very cool with your viewpoint (and Jason's and others). But that's how I feel.

It's here. For now. I hope it doesn't stick around. But I'm not going to embrace it because I think it's wrong and goes against so much of what I believe the game of baseball is all about--a perfect game played in an imperfect world.

 

[TonyD]

the ads dont bother me at all and as mike showed they have been a part of baseball lore and it's charm.
I look at old tapes of hockey and have to admit it's really atrange to see no ads anywhere.

see the Ballantine beer scoreboard at old Connie mack and the alpo sign.



btw check out the dimensions of that stadium which was squeezed into a small city block.


447 to center field.

 

[Mike Frezon]

What a shame that there's no ballpark named after Connie Mack any more. He was one of the greatest figures in the game.

Tony: Is there ANY visible monument/building/tribute for Connie anywhere in Philly that you know of?

 

[Philip Hamm]

Ouch! Can you say "triple"? How about "Inside the park home run"?

 

[Mike Frezon]

Look at how much room there is behind the centerfielder
in the picture Tony posted!

It looks like there's a warning track--before there were warning tracks!

BTW, I'm in favor of the change which added warning tracks inside ballparks!

EDIT: It looks like they had "monster seats" in right center field, too!