Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_
I don't disagree 100%, but I just think the effect of those plays are getting blown out of proportion. They didn't change the outcome of the game. None of those plays were going to add 3-4 runs. My main objection to going to heavy replay is the speed of the game. If it could be done without the whole manager objections, ump gathering, going under the stands, standing around and waiting and then finally coming back out to decide a play that might not even have any major bearing on the game...I don't know, I just don't see it being done quickly and smoothly. Too many things already slow the game down too much. There should be a rhythm to the game, the last couple of decades, I've seen that go by the wayside quite a bit.
You never know what will affect the game. I've seen plenty of two out rallies when absolutley nothing was going on. If that play in the 9th had been overturned then the Reds possibly could have had the base loaded and no one out. Lots more pressure in that situation than even two on and one out.
All it would take is a 5th umpire in the booth to do replays. He would buzz down to the crew chief when he was reviewing a play and let them know if overturned or not. With the quick technology today most plays could be reviewed and determined in about a minute. Most times an argument from the manager takes longer than that unless you are Dusty Baker and never go out to argue a call anymore. Just boggles my mind that MLB won't do that. NFL and NBA use replay about as much as they can. No reason MLB can't.