Let's See that Again

It's finally happening. I had thought it wouldn't, I had hoped it wouldn't, but here it is. This weekend the crew chief at every Major League Baseball game will have the option to use instant replay to determine a call. Oh sure, it's only to be used for disputed home-runs, fair/foul calls, and fan interference. At least for now... what about hit batsmen? balls caught/trapped in the outfield? calls at the plate? close calls at any base? The possibilities are endless. Seriously. The rationale is that this will be used for "game changing calls." This is a silly assertion at best.

Part of the beauty of baseball is that virtually any play can be be a "game changing" play. The unique combination of a lengthy game, precise rules, potential human error, and highly skilled players mean that anything can happen over the course of nine innings. On one hand, games are won on the smallest of margins. Decided by one mistake, one great catch, one clutch hit, one wild pitch, etc. On the other hand, no obstacle or error is insurmountable. Virtually no lead is enough, no pitcher too good to hit, no fielder too good for an error. Baseball is a game where there is always hope. There is not such a fine distinction between a "game changing play" and a "non-game changing play" until after the game is over.

Given that games are often decided by a single homerun, rallies are started with a single hit, and post-season glory can be denied by fan interference (eh Cub fans? OK, in the long history of the Chicago Cubs that bit of blame shifting has to take the cake for silliness), bad calls do occasionally decide games as well. We all wish this weren't the case, and I do applaud the umpires for signing on to this in the interest of a fair game. However, even MLB admits that the instances where it has allowed instant replay are quite rare. (Frankly, those "rare" instances would be cut in half if Minute-Maid Park in Houston hadn't been designed by a kindergarten class at recess) They cast this as a good thing, and it is, but it's also an argument against the use of the replay. If it's so rare, why should we bother with the cost and bother of instant replay at all? From the previously linked-to article:

"It's such an infrequent occurrence," said A's manager Bob Geren, whose club defeated the Twins, 3-2, in a homerless game at McAfee Coliseum. "The umpires are so good and you have four of them out there. Very rarely will this really be used, in my opinion."

My point exactly, then why have it? There are plenty of complaints that the game is too slow already, why add another hindrance? Baseball is a game played by humans (I guess we can talk about steroids later...) and officiated by humans. I've always liked the way disputed calls are generally handled. The umpires get together and talk about it like adults, the crew chief gives the call and the game goes on. Do we really want to turn MLB into the NFL? Where no play is complete until it has been minutely examined from every angle? Where officials, coaches, announcers, and players continually wrangle over definitions of "catch," "in bounds," etc. I for one don't want to see that happen to my beloved baseball.

Oh, I know, some of that is just sentimentality on my part, but seriously, it's just not needed. If Major League Baseball wants to address issues that affect games (and even careers) there are plenty of other issues. Inconsistent strike zones for one. Random drug testing for another.

I don't expect baseball to never change with the times, I'm not naive about the myriad of changes over the years. I do think this change, as it is now, addresses a problem that doesn't really exist in a significant way. The proposed fix to this this non-existent problem also opens the door for the further micro-management of a game that has been successfully played for well over a century without cameras making the calls. Let the players play, let the umpires officiate, lets not turn the game into a spectacle.

~Gabriel