Purists might be reaching for the Maalox today, but if baseball's plan to hatch instant replay this weekend goes off without a hitch, the game's officials, umpires, players and fans won't need any sort of digestive aid come October.
And by then, maybe even the purists will relent.
Thirty, 20, even 10 years ago, the idea of bringing instant replay into the game was about as appetizing as Charles O. Finley's pitch to play with orange baseballs.
|
|
| Perhaps fans won't have to sit through as many of these arguments. (US Presswire) |
More importantly, the places in which they play the game have changed. Dramatically.
Which is why, as long as it stays limited to so-called "boundary calls" -- whether apparent home runs are fair or foul, and whether or not they traveled over the fence -- adding instant replay is an idea whose time has come.
Memo to purists: It took me awhile to come around, too. What finally convinced me was, of all people, the umpires themselves.
These fancy new ballparks with their oddly angled outfield fences and quirky yellow lines?
They're heaven for fans.
They can be hell on umpires.
This point was driven home to me not long after Petco Park opened in San Diego in 2004. It's a clean, open and very nice ballpark.
But while talking with umpire Tim Tschida one day during Petco's first season, he gazed out toward the corner of the Western Metal Supply building -- the corner that doubles as the left-field foul "pole" -- and said, "Uh-oh, that's going to be trouble there, eventually."
To my knowledge, there hasn't been. Yet.
But point taken.
It's the same with the rest of the umpires. First thing they do when they walk into a new ballpark isn't check out their dressing quarters or admire the view.
No, they look toward the outfield fences and determine how much of a nightmare it's going to be to make a call.
Since Camden Yards opened in 1992, 16 other ballparks have opened. Some of them have outfield walls that zig, others have walls that zag. Some turn hard at 90-degree angles before proceeding merrily along their way, others have taunting yellow stripes painted on them. If a ball thuds above the line it's a homer, below the line, it's in play.
Double? Triple? No, wait ... homer?
The more retro the better, because fans, with good reason, love them.
But some of the angles are so tricky, it's darned difficult to judge whether a ball went fair or foul even by watching six replays at home or in the press box. Given that, how is an umpire supposed to call it with the naked eye from 200 feet away?
One suggestion seems simple on the surface: Just add two more umpires per crew, creating left- and right-field line judges for regular-season games like they do in the playoffs.
That might be something to consider, too. But in that 1996 American League Championship Series opener at Yankee Stadium, Richie Garcia still couldn't get his butt out to right field quickly enough to see fan interference from Jeffrey Maier. Instead it went home run, Derek Jeter, and the Yankees went on to take out Baltimore.
| |||||||||||||||||||
"That ball was over, anyway," Jeter told me at this year's All-Star Game, eyes twinkling.
Yep, and George Steinbrenner is Santa Claus.
Had replay been in play then, it would have revealed to Garcia and crew what the rest of us saw on the second, and third, and 20th and 2,000th replays: Jeter's home run should have been disallowed and that the Orioles' 4-3 eighth-inning lead should have held.
And who knows what might have happened after that?
Come this postseason, if replay works the way it is supposed to, there will be no more room for wondering and teeth-gnashing during key October long-ball moments.
Which, good as the umpires usually are, still is a welcome development.
Yes, the fact that baseball, long criticized for moving at a tortoise's pace through the years, is instituting such a big change in midseason might seem odd. But if the decision is going to be made eventually -- and the game's general managers voted 25-5 last winter in favor of it -- why not make sure it's in place before the postseason?
Test drives never hurt.
The biggest worry is that replay could slow the games in a sport that has been searching for ways to speed them up. But if the system works properly, a quick review of a particular play could actually save time: If the play is controversial enough, viewing the replay could circumvent the long, drawn-out arguments that inevitably follow.
What would become especially unwieldy is if baseball eventually expands instant replay to safe-out calls, strike-zone interpretations and assorted other plays. Nearly every play in every game includes an umpire's judgment, from whether or not the pitch was a strike to whether a runner beat the throw.
There is little appetite for replay in those instances right now, either within the game or outside of the game. (For that, pass the scorecard and praise the Lord!)
But home runs? By definition, nearly every one struck looms large enough to be a game-changer.
And if you can click your TiVo button at home and re-watch a play in, literally, two or three seconds, why not use a similar avenue to aid the umpires? Especially for what everyone wants: Making sure the call is right.
Strange, huh? Retro ballparks and advanced digital technology. On the surface, these two would appear to be the complete antithesis of each other.
Instead, it couldn't be a more perfect pairing.
