Instant
replay a necesity for baseball disputes
to be accurate
Kim Oswell
Nobody claims they
are perfect, they just claim to be doing their job. But in the grand scheme
of baseball, umpires may be the most critical component.
Disputed calls and
arguing managers are often a key ingredient to the outcome of a game, and
history shows that disputed calls by umpires have the power to change games.
October is the most critical month in baseball. The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim
are locked in a battle with the Chicago White Sox to win the American League
Championship Series and a ticket to the World Series. The Angels were ahead 1-0
in the seven-game series until the White Sox beat them in game two because of
an absurd umpire ruling.
In baseball, there are so many different rules and statistics such as the dropped
third strike call—when the catcher drops the ball on a third strike and
the batter can run to first. In the second game of the ALCS, Angels catcher Josh
Paul caught the third strike thrown to White Sox batter A.J.
Pierzynsksi and the homeplate umpire, Doug Eddings, called the third out. Paul
rolled the ball toward the pitchers mound and the Angels trotted toward the dugout
when the umpire reversed the call and Pierzynski made it safely to first. Immediately,
Angels Manager Mike Scioscia flew onto the field and argued the call. The umpire
refused
to reverse the call, even after conferring with the third-base umpire.
The debate is whether or not to have instant replay in baseball. Football has
instant replay and when the officials are uncertain, they consult the replay
before even making a call. It is impossible for someone to see every detail about
a play when a pitch is coming at 90 mph. You blink and you miss the play.
In defense of his call and for sake of not looking like a complete idiot, Eddings
refused to reverse the call and the White Sox gained momentum to win 2-1.
Instituting instant replay would no doubt make a baseball game even longer than
it is now, but the sacrifice is minimal in comparison to being just and making
accurate calls. The archaic attitude of the baseball organization is defiantly
opposed to the reviewing of plays. I really do not understand this because without
instant replay, America’s pastime is being short changed.
Disputed calls are not new to the game or baseball fans. The 1985 “Don
Dekinger Call” during the St. Louis Cardinals and Kansas City Royals World
Series when Cardinals pitcher Todd Worrell was brought in to pitch to Darryl
Motley, who was taken out and Jorge Orta was substituted.
Orta hit a hard ground ball to first baseman Jack Clark and the routine play
seemed to be in time, but Orta was called safe. The umpire, Don Dekinger, refused
to refute the call and it was later proved that he had blown it. In turn, the
Royals ended up winning the game and eventually the Series.
Instant replay is not something that will hinder the game, but it will make the
game more accurate. There should be a limit on how many challenges each team
can make and there should never be instant replay when arguing balls and strikes.
Each team should be allowed two challenges a game which is fair because umpires
and coaches do make mistakes.
Grossly inaccurate calls clutter the dynamic and enigmatic essence of the greatest
game ever played. Instant replay should at least be implemented for postseason
games when every play counts and every error is magnified. Until the baseball
dictators decide to change, we are forced to deal with controversial calls and
upsetting defeats. At least we have something to talk about in the offseason.
|
