Limited instant replay debuts Thursday (8-28-08)

08/26/2008 7:37 PM ET
Limited instant replay debuts Thursday
New system will help umpires decide on close home run calls
By Barry M. Bloom / MLB.com

Major League Baseball will institute the use of instant replay on Thursday to determine disputed home run calls -- fair or foul, in or out of the ballpark, fan interference -- Commissioner Bud Selig announced on Tuesday.

The system, which has been under study since this past November when the general managers voted 25-5 to explore its use, will launch on Thursday when Minnesota opens a four-game series at Oakland, Texas is in Anaheim to play the Angels, and the Phillies are at Wrigley Field to play the Cubs.

Since it was determined that the use of replay should start when a series opens, it will be in use for all games beginning with Friday's action. Musing that implementing replay was really not like dealing with "Einstein's 'Theory of Relativity,'" the Commissioner said the apropos time to move ahead with it was now.

"I believe this is right," Selig said during a late afternoon conference call unveiling the new system. "I think the umpires believe it. I think the players believe it. The evidence [for using it] became overwhelming the more I looked at ballparks. You've got an umpire running out and he's 300-400 feet away, and it became impossible [for him to make the right call]. I'm delighted we're able to make this adjustment.

"As you well know, anytime you try to change things in baseball, it's both emotional and difficult, but this [decision] everyone really thought was in the sport's best interest. And that's why I made it."

As far as the players go, the Players Association put out a press release just at the start of the conference call saying that the union had signed off on the system at least for the end of the 2009 regular season and postseason. Like the umpires, who agreed to the plan last week, both unions have reserved the right to revisit it during the offseason.

"If further bargaining is not requested," the release said in part, "this agreement will remain in effect for the balance of the current Basic Agreement, through the 2011 season."

"Following the World Series, the players will review the matter, and then determine what course to take for the future," Don Fehr, the long-time director of the union, said. "While the use of instant replay is an experiment, we hope that over the balance of this season it will prove to be a success."

Rob Manfred, MLB's executive vice president of labor relations and human resources, confirmed during the call that both unions have an opportunity to re-address the issue this offseason, if necessary.

"But I want to emphasize that it really is our expectation that those talks will be about refinement rather than any significant changes," he said.

As far as the process in concerned, all televised MLB games will be monitored and staffed by an expert technician and either an umpire supervisor or a former umpire at Major League Baseball Advanced Media headquarters in New York.

A television monitor and a secure telephone link to MLB.com, placed next to the monitor, have been installed during the past few weeks at every Major League ballpark. The positions vary. Some are located in dugouts and others are near the umpires' dressing quarters.

Bob Bowman, the chief executive of MLB.com, noted that the Chelsea location has handled video feeds of every game -- recording them and capturing them -- for a number of years. They've also been streamed live on the Internet. Jimmie Lee Solomon, MLB's executive vice president of baseball operations, said MLB is taking advantage of that technology.

"We're going to look at all broadcast feeds that are available," Solomon said. "There will be different camera angles at times and a different number of feeds, but we will use every available feed that we can get."

If the crew chief determines that instant replay review is necessary on a particular disputed home run, then he will call the MLB.com technician, who will transmit the most appropriate video footage to the crew chief and the umpire crew on site. The umpire supervisor or former umpire will not have direct communication with any of the umpires on site.

The decision to reverse a call will be at the sole discretion of the crew chief. The standard used by the crew chief when reviewing a play will be whether there is clear and convincing evidence that the umpire's decision on the field was incorrect and should be reversed.

Once instant replay review is invoked, whether or not the call has been reversed, neither club will be permitted to further argue the decision. A player, manager or coach who continues to argue will be treated in the same manner as one who argues balls and strikes and subject to ejection from the game.

Any decision regarding the placement of runners, should a home run call be reversed, will be made by the crew chief. As is done in cases of fan interference, the crew chief will place the baserunners where he believes they would have been had the call been made properly.

Selig said that that he doesn't anticipate this process leading to long interruptions of games.

"I happen to believe that it's been wired so efficiently that you will have no more delay than when umpires had to reconvene and didn't have anything to go by to discuss the thing," he said. "I really believe that this will not lengthen games, but if we're efficient in handling it, it could actually shorten the games a little bit."

The eight owners who sit on the executive council along with Selig were briefed about this replay plan two weeks ago at the quarterly owners meetings in Washington. The full body of executives heard the same details the next day.

It was not an action item on the agenda and a vote by the 30 clubs was not necessary. Selig, in his capacity as MLB's chief executive, had the power to move forward and implement it on his own because there's no rule change.

It was also the GMs who determined this past November that they were in favor of one central replay location to review disputed home run calls, much like the National Hockey League utilizes to review contested goals.

The NHL reviews video only to judge disputed goals that are referred by one of the on-ice referees. That league has a central location in Toronto where every goal scored during the regular and postseason -- more than 6,000 -- is reviewed by off-ice officials. One is assigned at a monitor to watch a particular game, meaning that if there are 14 games on a particular night, 14 officials are utilized.

But unlike the NHL, MLB will have the crew chief on site make the decision, not the replay official.

"The crew chief will be more familiar with the ground rules of each particular park," said Bob DuPuy, MLB's president and chief operating officer. "If there's a need to meet with the press after the game, the crew chief is on site, obviously vs. someone who is in Chelsea making the call. All of those reasons were taken into account, sticking with the crew chiefs."

MLB is the last of the major professional team sports to utilize instant replay in some fashion. The National Basketball Association uses it to review last-second baskets at the end of each quarter. The National Football League uses it on a much wider scope to review a variety of plays.

Selig has always been an ardent opponent of using replay in baseball because, as a traditionalist, he was fond of the human elements having a profound affect on the game. As is his constitution, he painstakingly studied the issue during the past nine months and determined that it was time to adopt the technology.

In the end, he changed his mind, if only in part.

"My opposition to unlimited instant replay is still very much in play," he said. "But when you look at the technology we have and you look at the new ballparks -- and even some of the older ballparks that have been reconfigured -- there's no question that [these calls] were a challenge for the umpires and everyone else. Like so many times in life, you have to make an adjustment. And this seemed right for that."

But as far as answering those who believe that baseball has now embarked on a more slippy slope as far as replay is concerned, Selig was pretty definitive.

"This is most limited," Selig added. "I know there's been some concern that if you start here who knows what this could lead to? Not as long as I'm the Commissioner."

At 74, Selig's contract expires at the end of the 2012 season.

Barry M. Bloom is a national reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.

too late to use with that bonehead call the 2nd base ump made earlier in the game!

08/26/2008 11:39 PM ET
Rogers not a fan of instant replay
Tigers pitcher says mistakes are part of the game
By Jason Beck / MLB.com

DETROIT -- Kenny Rogers' game is all about changing speeds, keeping hitters off-balance. That's how he wins. He isn't a big fan, however, of the effect instant replay could have on a pitcher's outing and the pace he could lose.

"For me, it [affects me] more than most," Rogers said on Tuesday afternoon. "I don't know how [other] players feel about it, but as a pitcher, I don't like it. I think that they overshot the mark by far just because in a Yankee game, I guess, somebody didn't get a homer."

Rogers is referring to a disputed home run during the Yankees' win over the Orioles on May 21. Alex Rodriguez hit a home run that cleared the fence in right-center field, replays showed, but umpires ruled it a double after conferring.

"Please," Rogers said. "It's happened thousands of times. It's part of the game. It's the beauty of the game. I mean, mistakes are made. It's not like anybody wants to make mistakes, especially the umpire. They're doing the best they can, and that's always enough. The best that they can do in the end is always enough. If it's not [enough] for certain hierarchy or whatever, I think that's a shame."

The 43-year-old Rogers is one of baseball's most veteran pitchers, having made his Major League debut in 1989. He opened the season as the oldest player in the American League. However, it isn't a rebellion against technology that drives his sentiment against replay, but a sentiment towards umpires and the element of human error in the game.

"I'm against it for a lot of different reasons," Rogers said, "but mainly because I think it's just a slap in the face of umpires that have been around a long time. And they've done a very good job with difficult situations in all aspects. So they get calls wrong once in a while. We've all done things wrong once in a while. I wish we could take them back. It's not part of the game. It's not part of life."

The other concern for him is the effect a lengthy delay for replay could have on a starting pitcher, especially if he's in the middle of an effective outing. Justin Verlander expressed a similar opinion over the weekend, before Major League Baseball announced its plans to begin using instant replay to review questionable home runs starting with series that begin Thursday or later.

The reversal of a home run, in Rogers' opinion, is not worth the loss of a game's flow.

"This is one that probably doesn't benefit pitchers, which I am always against," Rogers said. "I just don't think you need to go down that road. If you're going to go down that road, if you're going to be fair about it all, then you have to go [review] other situations, too. You have to start going and checking calls everywhere. Why is it just the home run that we're going to check? Fair balls, plays at second and home, all of them. Balls and strikes, we're doing that already [with Questec]. I don't think that's right, either.

"I like the individual interpretations of the game to be as valid input as any video. I think that's part of the beauty of the game. When you start taking away from that, I think you're going down the wrong road, and I don't like it."

The fact that replay has been used in other sports does not sway his sentiment.

"I don't think we have to follow the direction of other sports," Rogers said. "I think our game is beautiful the way it is. Subtle changes here and there are OK to a degree, but I think they've made quite a few changes over the last 50 years."

Reactions from the Tigers were mixed. Manager Jim Leyland has said publicly he supports the idea of getting home run calls right, mainly because he understands how difficult it can be to determine whether a home run hits above or below the yellow line in the outfield of many new ballparks.

"I like it for home runs," Leyland said on Sunday. "I think a home run should be a home run. It's tough to see in some of these places."

When told that the system would go into place this weekend, Leyland said, "Fine with me."

Catcher Brandon Inge supported his pitchers' concerns. He had heard secondhand reports on testing and how long a delay it could cause, and he wasn't encouraged.

As for the effect a delay could have on the pace of a game, Inge said, "Crush it. You're talking about a pitcher who might possibly lose an inning of work. Say that's the only hit he's given up, and the game's going along. So, for one home run, you're going to cost the guy an inning? It could be damaging to a pitcher.

"Me personally, I don't like it, because I'm also about the tradition of a game. I would think that Babe Ruth and Teddy Ballgame might be rolling in their graves about stuff like this. This is why people come to the games, to see the human interaction. You have the umpire calling the game, when it's his call, he's doing his best."

Jason Beck is a reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.

08/26/2008 5:00 PM ET
Recent history led to replay for MLB
Several disputed calls this year paved way for new system
By Bryan Hoch / MLB.com

NEW YORK -- Major League Baseball had been one of the last remaining professional sports not to utilize some form of instant replay, hoping to preserve a human element that has characterized umpiring since the game's inception.

Commissioner Bud Selig had repeatedly stated his opposition, but that stance shifted considerably this season, a campaign that has been marked by numerous missed calls as umpires adjust to the nuances of more challenging ballpark dimensions.

Well before umpires mistakenly ruled on three home run calls in the span of four days this May, missed calls had become part of the game's lore.

One prominent example in recent history was Derek Jeter's disputed home run in the 1996 American League Championship Series. Had baseball enjoyed access to instant replay at that time, right-field umpire Richie Garcia would have seen what television viewers across the country did: that 12-year-old Jeffrey Maier reached over the wall, snaring the baseball from directly over the head of Orioles outfielder Tony Tarasco and bringing it over the wall for a home run that tied Game 1.

The game went into extra innings and ended when Yankees outfielder Bernie Williams hit a walk-off homer in the 11th. American League President Gene Budig denied Baltimore's protest of the game, but upon seeing a replay after the game, Garcia admitted he had been wrong in awarding Jeter a homer. Jeter has since said that he favors instant replay, despite the topic of the Maier incident: "It was a home run, wasn't it?" Jeter said, smiling.

Major League umpires have been encouraged to gather to discuss controversial calls, with numerous reversals and correct outcomes determined. But umpires cannot correctly rule on home run plays they cannot clearly see, which is where instant replay would help during a time when stadiums have sacrificed clarity in favor of fan-friendly amenities.

"It's so tricky now with all the ballparks and the different dimensions," Giants manager Bruce Bochy said. "[The umpires are] not enough. They can't always pick it up. You have all these quirks that make it so difficult. I can't tell sometimes, and players can't tell sometimes. I believe it's the way to go. You want to get it right."

The debate over the use of instant replay in Major League games was renewed in force this year by three missed calls over the span of a four-day period. In a nationally televised May 18 Subway Series game at Yankee Stadium, the Mets' Carlos Delgado had a three-run homer taken away, though third-base umpire Mike Reilly originally -- and correctly -- signaled home run.

Plate umpire Bob Davidson overturned Reilly's ruling, returning Delgado to bat as television replays showed the baseball had left a scuff at the base of the left-field foul pole. Then-bench coach Jerry Manuel was ejected for arguing and Delgado instead returned to bat, though the call did not affect the outcome of the game, an 11-2 Mets victory.

"My three partners were adamant that the ball was foul," Reilly said at the time. "Very, very tough call. You got all the fans down there, standing around the pole, hands up. Actually, sometimes you can almost get blocked out. We want to make sure we try to get it right."

The next evening at Minute Maid Park in Houston, umpires ruled that a ball hit by the Cubs' Geovany Soto was in play, believing that the ball hit off the center-field wall. Soto rounded the bases with an inside-the-park home run on the play, though he should have been immediately credited with a home run anyway.

"When I turned first, and I was about to step on second, the umpire called safe, like the play's still live," Soto said. "I tried to get to third with a standup triple, but [third-base coach] Mike Quade waved me home. I was like, 'No way.' I was using my last breath to get to third, and he wants me to go home. I just kept going, and I just got there."

Umpire Joe West later said that he had lost sight of the ball, and in response, Astros ground crew workers later removed a piece of wood that had been painted yellow and contributed to the distraction.

"There's no need for that type of confusion in a big league ballpark," said Bob Watson, MLB's vice president of rules and on-field operations.

The third and final call in the troublesome stretch came on May 21, when umpires took a home run away from Alex Rodriguez. The Yankees third baseman hit a ball off a set of yellow stairs past the fence in right-center field at Yankee Stadium, bouncing back on to the field as Rodriguez was forced to speed up his running and slide into second base with a double.

"I didn't see it," Rodriguez said. "I could just tell by the reaction of all the guys in the dugout, and by the reaction of all the Baltimore guys, that it was a home run."

The lost homer did not affect the outcome of an 8-0 Yankees victory, but may prove to be a footnote in Rodriguez's chase to become baseball's all-time king, costing him what would have been No. 525.

Asked if he was a proponent of instant replay, A-Rod said, "Well, I did tonight. I didn't want it the other night against the Mets. I'm torn."

To ward off future occurrences, the Yankees installed a chain-link fence over the staircase to deaden balls and keep them over the wall, while manager Joe Girardi pledged his support for instant replay.

"I like that," Girardi said. "I think it should be for the home run and the home run only. I actually think it would be a quicker decision, and it would speed up the game."

There have been other examples this season. Yet another call occurred on August 3 at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia, when the Phillies' Shane Victorino was credited with a two-run home run on a ball that sliced foul inside the left-field pole. It may have meant little to the Marlins that evening, who won the game, 8-2, but by that moment, the movement to put instant replay into the toolbelt of Major League umpires was already well under way.

In fact, Major League Baseball had a camera in place near the Phillies' dugout that night, testing for the upcoming rollout of instant replay, though third-base umpire Dale Scott did not have the technology at his disposal.

"That is what replay is going to be there for," Scott told the Philadelphia Daily News after the game.

Florida third baseman Jorge Cantu had the best view of Victorino's drive and said that there was no doubt the ball was foul.

"I tried to tell him to ask for help. They agreed it was a home run," Cantu said. "Everybody missed it. I don't argue unless I need to argue, because I knew the truth. It was right in front of me. I knew it was a foul ball. That's why there is all the talk about instant replay."

Major League general managers approved the limited use of instant replay in November 2007, recommending it through a 25-5 vote during an annual meeting. The voting was conducted regarding limited boundary calls, such as determining whether possible home runs are fair or foul, if balls have actually cleared fences, and to review potential fan interference.

Many Major League players and managers pledged support for the instant replay program this season.

"I think something like that will be useful," Tigers manager Jim Leyland said. "That's a huge impact. I mean, some guy hits a three-run homer, a legitimate three-run homer, and you get nothing for it -- I think they should look at it. As long as you don't turn it into a fiasco, I think it's good. I don't have any problem with that."

"I think most guys are for it," said the Twins' Michael Cuddyer, who still recalls losing a home run in 2006 to a missed call. "I don't think it's going to take time away from the game. No more so than when they meet and are standing there and nothing is resolved anyway. Now they can meet, stuff will be resolved and we can go forward."

In discussions, the elapsed time of games and recent efforts to trim wasted seconds from play have been addressed. However, instant replay is not believed to require significantly more time than is wasted by having managers argue calls on the field.

In fact, the addition of instant replay to the umpires' repertoire may actually help save time in Major League games for the remainder of the season.

"I'm just for getting calls right," said Kenny Williams, the GM of the White Sox. "It's nothing against the umpires or trying to take away the human element of the game. I'm for getting the call right because there's so much at stake. Let's not have something happen at a very pivotal moment that changes the course of history for a particular franchise."

Bryan Hoch is a reporter for MLB.com. Numerous MLB.com reporters contributed to this story. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.

What an asinine decision by MLB. They should not even have replay.

But if they do, They should at least wait until 2009 and have it for an entire season.

They played most of this year with out it; Now they are gonna change with a month to go


STUPID!

TIGERS CORNER
Tigers split on new instant replay rules

BY JOHN LOWE • FREE PRESS SPORTS WRITER • August 27, 2008

Amid varying opinions on instant replay in the Tigers clubhouse, Gary Sheffield has the oldest firsthand experience with the issue.

Sheffield recalled Tuesday how in his first at-bat -- for Milwaukee at Tiger Stadium on Sept. 4, 1988 -- he hit a drive down the leftfield line that he believed was a homer. But the umpires called it foul.

If they'd had replay then, Sheffield could have been credited with his first homer. But his first homer didn't come until several days later.

Now, starting Thursday, baseball will use instant replay to guarantee that home-run calls are correct.

"They said they were trying to speed up the game, and this isn't going to help," Sheffield said. "But nowadays, everything going on with the game and life is about change.

"So it might be good. It might be bad. I guess it's worth a try."

Curtis Granderson, the Tigers' representative with the players union, pointed out that replay has been agreed to only for the rest of the year.

"It's an experiment -- we'll see how it works," Granderson said. "It may be something that is completely horrible or completely helps us out a lot."

Granderson added of replay: "We're the only major sport that doesn't have it. I don't see it being too bad."

Tigers pitcher Justin Verlander opposes instant replay.

"I'm just a fan of the game and the way it's been played for 100-plus years," Verlander said. "I'm also afraid you're going to open Pandora's box, and replay may leak into safe-out and ball-strike calls, and that's the worst thing that could happen to the game."

In the umpires room at Comerica Park, Charlie Reliford gave his view of instant replay. Reliford is the crew chief of the umpires for this series, and it will be the crew chiefs who decide whether replay is used to review a call.

"I'm trying to have an open mind and say you can't stop technology, and anything that helps me do a better job, I'm for it," Reliford said. "Instant replay has been our (the umpires') friend, not our enemy, showing that we have great skill at what we're doing. But the calls we're talking about reviewing are game-changing calls.

"And they are extremely difficult calls for us. The construction of the new ballparks that has made them 'fan friendly' is a way of saying 'very umpire unfriendly.'We often have low outfield walls, fans reaching over, and the poles or ledges that are on or just behind the fence that we'd need X-ray vision to see.

"So we're going to use what technology has brought us to try to do a better job. We're not fighting it because anything that helps me to do a better job, I'm for it. I'm sure there are things out there that we haven't thought of that we'll still have to face to make this even better."

Tiger Stadium was a lot more fan friendly and closer to the action than Comerica Park.


Only reason they doing this shit is because A-Rod got screwed!


If it happened to Maggs or Miggy; nothing would have changed

true!

Instant Replay in Baseball Sucks

I don't like it one bit.


Good Job Selig!


You Bonehead!

And you know this is just the start;

It will expand beyond HR calls

I like it. The fish got totally screwed in Philly on a homerun call that was clearly a foul ball.

08/31/2008 12:13 AM ET
Replay not used in close Polanco call
Towering fly down left-field line ruled foul ball and not reviewed
By David Just / MLB.com

DETROIT -- Replay history was nearly made in the ninth inning of Saturday night's Tigers-Royals game at Comerica Park.

Tigers manager Jim Leyland approached third-base umpire Tom Hallion after Placido Polanco hit a high fly ball down the left-field line that would have been a home run, if fair. Hallion ruled it foul.

The Tigers skipper felt the play deserved a second look, if not by the umpiring crew, then by the new replay system.

There has not been a case in which replay has been used since it debuted on Thursday, but Polanco's drive was certainly the closest call yet.

"That's always a tough one," Leyland said after the game. "I went out to question it because, to be honest with you, I wasn't sure. And this is how Tom handled it, which I thought was pretty good. I said, 'Tommy, would you check, because I'm not really sure, but I think it might have been a fair ball.'

"[Hallion] said, 'Well, I'll check with the home-plate umpire, but I am positive it was a foul ball.' They conferred, and they obviously either saw it the same way or nobody said anything. He was only gonna check with the home-plate umpire, which I thought was fair -- the home-plate umpire is looking at it right down the line."

Unlike football, a manager is not allowed to request that replay be used. That decision is only allowed to be made by the umpire crew chief, who will also make the final determination as to whether or not a call should be reversed.

"That's one that I probably would have requested, but you're not allowed to do that," Leyland said. "The umpire has to think that it warrants looking at the replay, and obviously, Tommy did not. As a manager, you accept that. I thought he was fair in saying he would check. They said foul ball, and there's nothing I can do about it."

There was disagreement among the Tigers staff and players over whether or not the ball was actually fair.

"Some of the players were saying fair ball," Leyland said. "So, I don't really know. I can't really tell on the replay."

The Royals dugout was sure, though, that it was, in fact, foul.

"We could see it pretty clear from where we were that, unless it had had more height, it definitely went on the left side of the foul pole [and was foul]," Royals manager Trey Hillman said.

"I was hoping," Mark Teahen said. "If they were going to have it, I was hoping to be on the field the first time they've used it. But it was pretty clearly foul. But it's history, you know."

With the score being 13-3 in favor of the Royals at the time, the home run would have had very little bearing on the outcome of the game.

One reporter asked Leyland if he thought replay would have been used, had the game been closer.

"That's a great question," Leyland said. "You'd have to ask the umpire that question. ... I might ask him that question myself."

David Just is an associate reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.

I think if the score had been closer, they would have reviewed it



Can't believe KC kicked the Tigers ass that bad tonight


FIRE LEYLAND