What Should MLB Do About Replay Review?

[Ron Madden]

So how should baseball fix replay review? SI's MLB staff considered some possible improvements:

Tom Verducci

The replay system works very well but it could use two upgrades: transparency and speed.

The transparency involves putting a microphone on the crew chief to make sure paying customers actually understand what just happened. It’s insulting to leave them without explanation when calls are upheld or changed. Thankfully, this change should be coming by the end of this season or next season, per an agreement with the umpires.

Transparency also means we know who made the call and why it was made. Name the replay official working in New York who made the call and provide a one-sentence, specific reason why the call was made. Don’t leave us guessing.

Emma Baccellieri

This is an idea that hadn't occurred to me before I saw former Braves outfielder Lane Adams share it on Twitter last week, but the more I think about it, the more I like it: Don't share the call with the review crew before they get a chance to look at the play.

As the rules work now, there must be clear and convincing evidence for a call to be overturned. But I think that language creates an unnecessary hurdle. The question shouldn't be, "Is there sufficiently convincing evidence to overturn this call?" It should be, "Is the runner safe or out?" The goal should be to get the decision right, regardless of how it was originally called on the field, and I think that gets complicated by placing the burden of proof like this. Just have them assess the play itself! Maybe place a time limit on the process, and if the reviewers cannot make a decision quickly enough in New York, revert to the ruling on the field. But I think a shift like this would be useful for reframing the process—with a focus on making sure calls are right.

Read more here https://www.si.com/mlb/2021/04/15/ml...s-mets-marlins

[Crumbley]

Just get rid of it. They play 162 games, the bad calls will even out.

[KYExtemper]

I'd prefer they scrap replay altogether. Most times I see the umpires go to replay they still get the call wrong.

[KronoRed]

I'd prefer they scrap replay altogether. Most times I see the umpires go to replay they still get the call wrong.

Intentionally.

I'd change it so the people doing the reviews are not part of the umpires union or affiliated in any way, no more friends backing up their buds on wrong calls.

[*BaseClogger*]

I think they should keep replay but let the fans vote on twitter to determine the call

[Chip R]

If they have the technology, they are going to use it. They aren't going back to the stone age and just not use it when they have the technology to do so. I think the main two gripes about replay is the time it takes to uphold/overturn a call and not getting the replay call right.

The solution to the first problem is to make replay reviews last one minute (it should be like that in every sport, not just baseball.) Dovetailing with that is eliminating umpires' challenges. Managers should only be the ones to initiate a challenge - much like football. I know football gets a lot of grief about replay but that is mainly for situations that are nebulously defined: Catch, not a catch, fumble, not a fumble, arm going forward or not. Their system is pretty good. A coach gets two challenges a game and a third if they are successful on the first two. If the call is upheld, the coach loses a challenge. Make it like that in baseball. A manager gets two challenges a game. If you use it and the call is overturned, you keep it, if not, you lose it. Keeping replays at one minute will more than likely eliminate the plays where a player slides into second and is/is not tagged when his foot comes of the bag for a micro-second. Managers can still challenge that play but they have to realize that potentially losing a challenge may not be worth it. Replay is supposed to fix the most outrageous misses: The Don Denkinger play in the 85 World Series, the call that Jim Joyce blew at 1st to break up a perfect game. Calls like that, a replay official can look at and figure out it was a bad call in 5 seconds.

Now there's nothing you can do if replay officials are sabotaging obvious incorrect calls and upholding them. I have no idea if their performance is graded like it is when they are on the field. If it isn't it should be and be taken into account when deciding post-season assignments. Most of these calls don't even need a real umpire. Just a set of good eyes.

[Big Klu]

I also think that managers should not be allowed to have their guy check replay before challenging. All replays should be initiated by what the manager witnesses with his own eyes. If he didn't have a good enough view but his coaches and/or players saw it, then he has to decide whether to take them at their word and risk the challenge.

Umpires have to make the calls with the naked eye. If you want to challenge their decision, then it's because you believe what you saw with the naked eye was different than what they saw.

[mth123]

Put a replay umpire in each park who watches the game in real time and sees the replays that all fans see. If he sees a bad call, he overturns it immediately. If not, the call on the field stands. This is an independent umpire and not part of the crew working the game. These guys would travel from park to park to eliminate any home town bias potential by being in the same park all year.

- eliminate the Manager challenge. It simply delays the game
- eliminate having to call New York or where ever and the wait for the replay be cued up and watched from 40 different angles.
- If a call can't be overturned within 30 seconds, the call stands.

The terrible calls would be corrected, the nitpicky "came of the bag for a fraction of a second" stuff probably wouldn't be caught. Delays would no longer occur. Since everything is being reviewed, no need for arguing anything.

[Big Klu]

Put a replay umpire in each park who watches the game in real time and sees the replays that all fans see. If he sees a bad call, he overturns it immediately. If not, the call on the field stands. This is an independent umpire and not part of the crew working the game. These guys would travel from park to park to eliminate any home town bias potential by being in the same park all year.

- eliminate the Manager challenge. It simply delays the game
- eliminate having to call New York or where ever and the wait for the replay be cued up and watched from 40 different angles.
- If a call can't be overturned within 30 seconds, the call stands.

The terrible calls would be corrected, the nitpicky "came of the bag for a fraction of a second" stuff probably wouldn't be caught. Delays would no longer occur. Since everything is being reviewed, no need for arguing anything.

I miss the days of Earl Weaver, Billy Martin, Lou Piniella, Sparky Anderson, Tommy Lasorda, Bobby Cox, and Dick Williams laying into an umpire and having a full-blown argument, usually followed by an ejection. It was much more entertaining than watching the umpires standing around with headphones on.

[mth123]

I miss the days of Earl Weaver, Billy Martin, Lou Piniella, Sparky Anderson, Tommy Lasorda, Bobby Cox, and Dick Williams laying into an umpire and having a full-blown argument, usually followed by an ejection. It was much more entertaining than watching the umpires standing around with headphones on.

I don't miss that at all. Grown men acting like idiots doesn't entertain me. It's the same reason I'm not into the tough talk and flexing and all the other stuff. I think its an embarrassment actually.

[goreds2]

I still think Winker was safe at 3rd base on Saturday. Or at the very least there was no hard evidence to overturn that call.

The Indians 3rd baseman did not even question the original safe call.