YAY! Expanded replay!

[Hairyducked Idiot]

My argument isn't about wasting time. It's about taking excitement away from the plays the plays themselves.

 

In football, how often do you see something exciting but borderline happen, and then you feel like you can't fully celebrate until the XP is kicked or the next play is snapped, meaning there won't be a challenge?

 

With replay, every remotely borderline play loses a little bit of luster, because you don't know the consequences for certain until either the replay is done or the window for replay has passed.

 

That bothers me more than the bad calls, which replay will significantly reduce but not eliminate.

[MSG T]

I look forward to the number of awesome moments being ruined by five minutes of "We don't know what happened, we're waiting for the call..."

 

Instead of 5 minutes of a manager kicking dirt on the ump, throwing his hat, and chucking a base across the field?

 

Yes. You don't think there's a difference between:

 

"Something cool just happened, now let's waste five minutes on some stupid manager arguing tradition."

 

vs.

 

"Maybe something cool just happened, or maybe it didn't, but let's wait five minutes to find out."

 

Maybe the latter doesn't bother you as much as it bothers me, but you can't say there's no difference.

 

 

Considering the number of times broadcasts are able to show if a call was correct or not before the next pitch is thrown, I think you're seriously overestimating the time effect this will have. Most overturned calls will happen rather quickly, and the ones that aren't as quick still won't take as long as the arguments generally last.

[MSG T]

I like this. I'm still interested to see how baserunners are handled (the potential issues that arise from a replay overturn are a lot worse in baseball than they are in football IMO) but if they can somehow work out a consistent system for that then this should be helpful to the sport.

 

 

To me this is the biggest thing. They'll have to sort through all of the ramifications of what to do with base runners that might have done something different if the call was made differently. The biggest issue there should be coming up with some standards, similar to what runners do on balls thrown out of play.

[MSG T]

My argument isn't about wasting time. It's about taking excitement away from the plays the plays themselves.

 

In football, how often do you see something exciting but borderline happen, and then you feel like you can't fully celebrate until the XP is kicked or the next play is snapped, meaning there won't be a challenge?

 

With replay, every remotely borderline play loses a little bit of luster, because you don't know the consequences for certain until either the replay is done or the window for replay has passed.

 

That bothers me more than the bad calls, which replay will significantly reduce but not eliminate.

 

 

Your excitement doesn't effect the W-L columns, bad calls can, and often do. Besides, how many times have people gotten up in arms when a bad call is made that is obvious using replay and is easily overturned but nothing can happen. Yeah the excitement might be taken out once in a while if a catch is overturned, but how about the excitement gained when a batter is called safe, though is obviously out, and that call is corrected. You're only looking at one side of the coin.

[erik316wttn]

As a fan, I'd be willing to sacrifice a few minutes in order for the correct call to be made on the field. I speak for only myself here, though.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Your excitement doesn't effect the W-L columns, bad calls can, and often do. Besides, how many times have people gotten up in arms when a bad call is made that is obvious using replay and is easily overturned but nothing can happen. Yeah the excitement might be taken out once in a while if a catch is overturned, but how about the excitement gained when a batter is called safe, though is obviously out, and that call is corrected. You're only looking at one side of the coin.

 

Sports excitement shouldn't come from a referee on a microphone.

 

I can live with the effect of the bad calls on the W-L column. It's not ideal, but acceptable.

[rocket]

 

In football, how often do you see something exciting but borderline happen, and then you feel like you can't fully celebrate until the XP is kicked or the next play is snapped, meaning there won't be a challenge?

 

practically never.

[Sammy Sofa]

My argument isn't about wasting time. It's about taking excitement away from the plays the plays themselves.

 

In football, how often do you see something exciting but borderline happen, and then you feel like you can't fully celebrate until the XP is kicked or the next play is snapped, meaning there won't be a challenge?

 

As many said when you brought this up before, not nearly as often as you're implying.

[rocket]

if anything, i get super excited when the borderline touchdown is made, relax a little bit, then get super excited again when the call is confirmed. it's like i'm getting twice the excitement!

[Guest]

Yeah, give me the drama of taking an extended look to see what the correct call is over the outrage and feeling cheated over a clearly wrong call that goes unchecked.

[MSG T]

Your excitement doesn't effect the W-L columns, bad calls can, and often do. Besides, how many times have people gotten up in arms when a bad call is made that is obvious using replay and is easily overturned but nothing can happen. Yeah the excitement might be taken out once in a while if a catch is overturned, but how about the excitement gained when a batter is called safe, though is obviously out, and that call is corrected. You're only looking at one side of the coin.

 

Sports excitement shouldn't come from a referee on a microphone.

 

I can live with the effect of the bad calls on the W-L column. It's not ideal, but acceptable.

 

 

Considering you're not the one getting paid to play the game, or manage or build the team that does, that's pretty short-sighted. Is there a tipping point of where it's not worth it? Sure, but given where technology is and the built in stoppages, it's rare that it would get to that point.

 

How hard would it be for an extra ump or third party to be in the press box watching a monitor see a close play and take an extra look? On most bad calls, they could have it fixed within 15-20 seconds, not five minutes. The reason the NFL model takes forever is because of the procedure they use and the fact that many times you're not just trying to see if it was a catch, but where the ball should be marked, what the guy covering was doing, etc. and trying to make those calls with 3 or 4 people blocking half of the views. Baseball is a much different animal in how replay can work.

[Banedon]

I'm trying to think of some really exciting play in baseball that would be affected by any kind of replay that could potentially ruin the excitmenet. A play at the plate is the obvious one. Maybe a close fair/foul call on what was thought to be a run scoring XBH down the line? I don't even think umps often get fair/foul calls wrong. The place I'm most interested in replay is on close plays at any base. And it looks like that's not going to be be a part of this intial "roll out". But it's gotta start somewhere.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm trying to think of some really exciting play in baseball that would be affected by any kind of replay that could potentially ruin the excitmenet. A play at the plate is the obvious one. Maybe a close fair/foul call on what was thought to be a run scoring XBH down the line? I don't even think umps often get fair/foul calls wrong. The place I'm most interested in replay is on close plays at any base. And it looks like that's not going to be be a part of this intial "roll out". But it's gotta start somewhere.

 

This is the one that popped to mind immediately for me:

 

 

One of the coolest baseball moments of the past 10 years. And when the ump raised his arms, that was it. Ninety seconds of replays, or even the possibility of such replays, before we found out the true result would have cheapened it.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I'm trying to think of some really exciting play in baseball that would be affected by any kind of replay that could potentially ruin the excitmenet. A play at the plate is the obvious one. Maybe a close fair/foul call on what was thought to be a run scoring XBH down the line? I don't even think umps often get fair/foul calls wrong. The place I'm most interested in replay is on close plays at any base. And it looks like that's not going to be be a part of this intial "roll out". But it's gotta start somewhere.

 

This is the one that popped to mind immediately for me:

 

 

One of the coolest baseball moments of the past 10 years. And when the ump raised his arms, that was it. Ninety seconds of replays, or even the possibility of such replays, before we found out the true result would have cheapened it.

So we shouldn't expand replay for something that rarely happens?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So we shouldn't expand replay for something that rarely happens?

 

We shouldn't have any sort of replay because the rare bad call isn't worse than the cheapening of virtually every cool sports moment involving a close play.

[MSG T]

So we shouldn't expand replay for something that rarely happens?

 

We shouldn't have any sort of replay because the rare bad call isn't worse than the cheapening of virtually every cool sports moment involving a close play.

 

 

Rare? I've seen bad calls, going both ways, in pretty much every game I've watched this year. Something that happens every game, or most every game, isn't rare. A close play that ends a game is rare, but not a bad call.

 

And how much excitement would have been lost if Dekinger would have made the Orta call correctly? I'm thinking none.

[Sammy Sofa]

Kyle's just being Kyle; he never gets to see anything happen live regardless because of all the buffering, so his complaints are moot.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Kyle's just being Kyle; he never gets to see anything happen live regardless because of all the buffering, so his complaints are moot.

 

Point conceded.

[XZero771679666304]

So we shouldn't expand replay for something that rarely happens?

 

We shouldn't have any sort of replay because the rare bad call isn't worse than the cheapening of virtually every cool sports moment involving a close play.

 

IMO, Nothing cheapens a big moment more than knowing it came as the result of a blown call.

 

It's a trade off (though you're embellishing a ton here), but I'll take getting right every time.

[rocket]

replay wouldn't have ruined the excitement of that play one bit.

 

and hot michael barrett would have made the playoffs. everyone wins.

[PosterToBeNamedLater]

I can kindof see what Kyle is saying. I am normally all for replay. In fact, I want K-zone to call balls and strikes. However, the NFL's "review every scoring play" annoyed me this year. However, as other people mentioned, it was more for stupid rules or the fact that they will still get things wrong after the replay. Sometimes, a TD would be overturned for a rule that no one even really knew about, or a play gets overturned that would have never even been reviewed if it was up to the opposing coach like most plays. For example, it would be sort of annoying when a great run for a touchdown is called back to the 1 inch line because as the player lept to the endzone, his knee may have grazed the grass as he was falling in. Once again, it probably wouldn't have even been reviewed by the opposing coach. I also remember a 40 yard touchdown pass from Rivers to a receiver who had complete control, came down in bounds the entire time and it was overturned because the defender who barely was touching the ball as well was standing out of bounds. Maybe I was just a bitter fantasy owner who had about a TD a week overturned on these types of calls.

 

But I think this is different. I think people will still get the excitement and won't really even think about the overturn until a replay is shown. They aren't stopping the game after every play to think about it. They will still go on as normal, but when someone in the booth sees something wrong--which is when we would all see it on replay as well, they will stop it. I don't think it will ruin any excitement. If anything, instead of just yelling at the screen, fans of the team getting screwed can yell at the screen with the hope of the call being overturned. It isn't like there are some weird rules in baseball. Either the ball was caught or it wasn't. It was either a home run or it wasn't. And if I was a fan of the team that got the benefit of the call, I would have no problem if it was overturned.

 

ETA: Also, how often do plays really need to be reviewed in baseball? Most plays are pretty clear. It isn't like football where plays that could be reviewed happen all the time.

[mul21]

So we shouldn't expand replay for something that rarely happens?

 

We shouldn't have any sort of replay because the rare bad call isn't worse than the cheapening of virtually every cool sports moment involving a close play.

 

So you're okay with Lawrie getting tossed from a game on at least 2 calls that were so completely awful that most blind people would have gotten them right? I mean, there comes a point at which the stupidity/incompetence of the people calling the games has to be remedied in some way. It seemingly gets worse every year.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I think Kyle has tried to make the argument before that football has been ruined for him be replay/review.

I know I'm in the vast minority, but I have to agree with Kyle on this. I wouldn't say that football has been "ruined", but instant replay has definitely changed how I view the game. Instead of being excited after a spectacular touchdown catch, now my first thought is whether or not it will be overturned. I don't want the same thing to happen in baseball, where a diving catch can't be celebrated because we have to wait for an answer to come down from the replay booth.

[Guest]

I think Kyle has tried to make the argument before that football has been ruined for him be replay/review.

I know I'm in the vast minority, but I have to agree with Kyle on this. I wouldn't say that football has been "ruined", but instant replay has definitely changed how I view the game. Instead of being excited after a spectacular touchdown catch, now my first thought is whether or not it will be overturned. I don't want the same thing to happen in baseball, where a diving catch can't be celebrated because we have to wait for an answer to come down from the replay booth.

 

You're so stuck in the 80's.

[Guest]

Every time I see this thread title, I think of the "Yay, Springfield!" line from that stupid radio commercial. Every time.