Tweet
Originally posted by rmc523
View Post
-
I understand, but go with the best possible choice based on the replay. It might be hard, but thats a better basis than a split second decision. -
So in that case, you'll just ignore that umpire's call completely because it goes to review? So in essence it's a non-call? Which means it effectively could become an "I can't quite tell, so we'll flip a coin" call?Originally posted by fish16 View Post
I'm not fully disagreeing with you - there are certainly times where a call looks like it could possibly be overturned, but since you're not sure you have to revert to the original call (call stands). I just think it's a little odd to completely remove the original call from the equation completely. Do other replay systems work this way?Comment
-
No, football does the same as baseball. I just find it stupid to give credence to a split second call on the field if it is not conclusive either way rather than just doing the best possible job with the replay. If there doesnt happen to be a good camera angle, that would be one thing where id understand using the call on the field, but if there is a good angle to see the play, just because the play is close doesnt mean it should be the same call unless it is clear and convincing the other way. You're just giving a decision that was made in a split second with one angle by one guy more authority then a group of umpires gathering together and viewing the replay from different angles and in slow motion.Originally posted by rmc523 View Post
Just splitting hairs, but unless there is no camera angle to properly see the play, there is no reason to give a call on the field more weight than the best possible choice the umps could make using replay and slow motion.
- - - - - - - - - -
The rationale just doesnt make sense. It is essentially saying that you should give the one umpire who made the call in real time from one (maybe terrible) angle more power than the technology that allows umpires to view the play from different angles and in slow motion.
And especially when the play is so close that you are not 100% convinced even on replay what the call is, why would you give the authority to the umpire who had one opportunity to view the play in real time and from one angle. If its that close shouldnt you go with the best choice you can make using technology like replay and slow motion than stick with the real time view from one angle from one guy?Comment
-
Like I said, I wasn't fully disagreeing with you, just thinking out loud. I guess it's just because I'm used to replay systems being how they've been. I definitely understand your points.Comment
-
It's been pretty sad watching Reyes defensively this series.Comment
-
not that it matters, but the team could do alot worse than a dietrich/rojas platoon at 2b next year if we trade Dee.Comment
-
These last couple of games just got a lot more interesting.Comment
-
Who’s coming down to the ballpark on Sunday to see #62?
Sec 5 Row F
See you there.Comment
-
At least we have something interesting to watch at these games.Comment
-
what an unreal year he's had. And really, its been mostly an unreal second half.Comment
-
Originally posted by Namaste View Post
Being completely honest........
No home runs in the last 3 games was disappointing.
The collective hushed groan in the ballpark after his last AB said it all. An amazing year but 60 HR’s is so much sexier than 59.
I also thought the turnout at the ballpark sucked. The guy was sitting on 59 HR’s. How often does that happen?
This is a shitty sports town (stating the obvious).Comment
Comment