Major League Baseball is completely clueless to what fans want

When asked to address instant replay at a recent BBWAA conference Bud Selig and Joe Torre said some pretty outlandish things. We’ll start with Selig because his words are the most prominent and furthest reaching, he said,

"We're going to expand instant replay when we have the technology to do it… Among all the people I talk to, nobody is anxious to increase instant replay. And I concur with that. That doesn't mean we won't continue to review it. Baseball is a game of pace. We've got to be very sensitive and careful in the way we proceed. I can tell you that the appetite for more instant replay in the sport is very low. There are some people who think we've gone too far already." 

This statement is so absurd you have to look at it sentence by sentence.

We're going to expand instant replay when we have the technology to do it…

How in the world does the MLB not have the technology to implement a proper replay system? Do they really think it's tougher to track what's going on in baseball than football? God forbid they install a few more cameras to give the umpires a better angle.

Among all the people I talk to, nobody is anxious to increase instant replay. And I concur with that

Who exactly do you talk to Bud? I don’t think I’ve spoken to anyone who agrees with that statement. Maybe people who are also ancient and need to find another job agree with you, but the fans do not. We’re sick and tired of routine calls being blown and know there’s a better way.

Baseball is a game of pace. We've got to be very sensitive and careful in the way we proceed.

If baseball is a game of pace then what is basketball, football, hockey, and soccer? Baseball is the game least reliant on pace of every major sport. I’m so confused by that statement and I would like to hear one logical argument explaining why replay would destroy the “pace” of MLB.

I can tell you that the appetite for more instant replay in the sport is very low. There are some people who think we've gone too far already.

Again, how out of touch are baseball officials if they think the appetite for more replay is low? Who doesn’t want more replay? The umpires? I haven’t read one article or heard any argument against the current replay outside of the fact that the majority thinking it needs to be expanded. These statements seem borderline insane to me.

To be fair to the MLB they are talking about expanding replay to include trapped balls in the infield (what?) and fair and foul balls. They just don’t know if they’ll have the technology in place to do this right now. I’m so confused what new fancy technology they have to put in place in order to get this system together. I think that’s just a crap way of saying we haven’t looked into all the details yet. Also, who has been demanding that we replay trapped balls in the infield, when does that ever happen or get called incorrectly?

Joe Torre also attended at this meeting as executive vice president of baseball operations and while he said one thing that made sense he also appeared to be way too senile to be doing the job he’s doing. (He has looked that way since 2005, when he was managing the Yankees) The only thing I agreed with that he said was that baseball was considering putting an umpire in the press box or installing a centralized location where the umpires can go watch replays. I vote for the latter but I’ve stated this kind of sentiment a million times because I hate stoppage in the game to watch officials go look at a replay we’ve already seen five times. I would consider most of the other stuff Torre said pretty insane though.

"It seems like replay comes up on whatever play happened last night,'' Torre said, "Because of technology we feel we can fix something quickly, but that's not the case.

I still don’t understand what this magical technology baseball needs to work out in order for us to get a proper replay in the sport but I’m very interested to know what it is. All Bud Selig and Joe Torre can tell us is that it revolves around adding more cameras. What else do they need to consider? Please someone enlighten me! The next quote from Torre is what is really bothersome though.

"The game is imperfect. For all of us who want everything to be right all the time, it's not going to happen. I don't know why we want everything to be perfect. It's an imperfect game. Life isn't perfect and this is a game of life."

This is total nonsense Joe Torre. You can make this argument about absolutely anything at all. “Well I didn’t fix the toilet because there’s no such thing as a perfect toilet, so let’s just the toilet overflow. I mean life’s not perfect and there’s no such thing as a perfect toilet, so why should our toilet be perfect.”

Nobody thinks we can officiate anything 100% correctly all the time but why would the goal be anything less? This falls into the realm of the “human element” and this argument just doesn’t have a leg to stand on. The games not perfect so let’s just blow calls on the base paths routinely for no reason. This is not about getting it perfect, this is about not being totally incompetent like the MLB Umpires are right now.

This whole conference was just a painful thing to watch and read about. These guys are old and totally out of touch with what the fans want. Despite a poll on ESPN showing that 60% of over 9,000 fans support an expansion of replay (evidence) we have the commissioner saying nobody is anxious to expand it. Maybe they’re not clamoring for it inside of MLB but outside of it, the people who actually pay your salaries and consume your product are asking, “What has taken so long?”

These guys had the audacity to say that the MLB is in a “golden age” right now. Yeah, baseball is in a golden age after you just tainted an entire era of your sport with a senseless PED witch-hunt and absolutely refuse to officiate your games to the standard of other professional sports. Yeah, I don’t know if we have the technology right now to determine whether this is a “golden age” or not, but we’ll get back to you on that Bud Selig.

Strange Replay Ruling in Yankees-Mariners

In the ninth inning of the Yankees-Mariners game there was a particularly strange replay ruling. The play on the field was ruled a home run and there was a runner on first base. The umpires deliberated and ruled that it was a double and that the runner from first base should score. I don’t see how this makes any sense at all.

How can they assume the runner from first would score? If you go back and watch the replay it’s clear that the runner was rounding third as the ball came into the infield so how can the umpires assume the runner would’ve scored?

If I were the umpire in this situation I would’ve awarded each player two bases and had runners on second and third. This has to be the call in this situation because you can’t assume the runner would’ve scored. The play had been signaled a home run and the runner from first wasn’t running hard so none of what happened during the play after that should be taken into account. If baseball’s interpreted like this then a ground rule double would always come down to a subjective call of whether the runner from first would’ve scored or not.

I’ve tried to research whether there is any precedent ruling like this and could not find anything. It seems like if the MLB put a replay system in place they couldn’t possibly just let the umpires subjectively put runner where they think they would’ve went. That’s a stupid system and the ground rule double rule completely contradicts it. I thought it was incorrectly called and I think we’re going to see a lot more calls like this made as the MLB (hopefully) incorporates a rational replay system.

Chris Paul’s Temper Tantrum and Technical Fouls

How did Chris Paul not get a technical last night? With only a few minutes to go in Game 6 of the Memphis-Clippers series Paul was called for a pretty non-controversial foul on a Memphis fast break. After the foul Paul had what could only be called a temper tantrum and proceeded to leap right at a ref screaming at him. Somehow this wasn’t interpreted as a technical foul.

This is starting to get out of hand. What is and what isn’t a technical foul in the NBA? Amare Stoudemire had to sit out a game last year because he had so many technical fouls for clapping his hands in frustration after bad plays. Carmelo Anthony got a technical foul for throwing a bounce pass too hard to an official in Game 1 of the Heat-Knicks series. Rajon Rondo got ejected from the last seconds of Game 1 of the Celtics-Hawks series for reacting to an atrocious game changing call, then tripping into a ref. Rondo’s actions were seen as so egregious that he was even suspended for the next game of the series.[1]

These are somehow worse than completely losing it and going right after a ref? I actually don’t mind Paul not getting a technical in that situation. I hate when officiating helps decide the outcome of a game, especially when it’s an emotional player at the end of a hard fought game. The only reason it’s absurd he didn’t get a technical is because technicals are consistently called for way less. If the NBA’s new “Respect the Game” rules mean it’s a technical when a player claps his hands then Chris Paul throwing a temper tantrum has to be called as well.

A big problem with officiating in the NBA is players are clearly officiated differently. It’s nothing new. It’s been this way ever since I can remember watching. It used to be frustrating watching different rules apply to Jordan compared the rest of the league and it’s just as frustrating to watch different rules apply to Lebron, Wade, Rose, Pierce, Garnett, Duncan, Parker, Ginobli, or any other player that has “earned” the respect of the officials. Outside of flopping, this is probably the worst part of watching the NBA.

It’s just frustrating to watch Rondo get ejected and suspended from a game for having less of a reaction than Chris Paul had last night. That’s the NBA though. End Rant.

---

[1] I found this to be completely absurd. I thought Rondo had every right in the world to be upset about that call, which essentially ended the game incorrectly. He clearly tripped into the official and did not mean to “bump him,” yet the NBA still suspended him for a game? Shouldn’t the official also be punished for ruining the end of the game? Why does the blame always have to be on the players? 

5 rules in sports that make 0 sense

1. Pass interference in the NFL – How is pass interference still a spot of foul penalty and not a 15 yard penalty like it is in college football? Does the NFL think if it was a 15 yard penalty there’d just be people tackled on every single long pass? I just can’t see how it’s logical to have 60 yard penalties based on the discretion of the referee. Making it a 15 yard penalty would greatly take away the referee’s impact on NFL games and I don’t see any reason for it not to be done immediately.

2. The lack of dedicated replay officials – Currently in the NFL, MLB, and NBA when something needs to be reviewed the officials stop the game for up to 10-15 minutes to go look at it. Why can’t there just be a replay official who sits in front of a crystal clear HD television and makes these calls? This is what college football does and while it doesn’t eliminate controversial rulings, at least we won’t waste 15 minutes watching Ed Hochuli under a tarp looking at a tiny television. The NFL system seems to be the most egregious offender of this because a lengthy review can completely destroy the momentum a team has gained. The NFL is actually proposing to change this system this offseason and I hope they do.

3. Pass or fumble in the NFL – I don’t know if there are more illogical rules in sports than what the NFL uses to determine whether a quarterback fumbled or passed the ball. Currently, if a quarterback begins to throw the football, loses his grip of it in the process, and still manages to throw it 15 yards down the field, it’s a fumble. However, if a quarterback tries to stop his throw and begins to tuck it into his body, it’s a pass. Does this make sense to anyone? If a quarterback’s arm gets hit and he still manages to use his finger tip to pass it down the field, how is it not considered a pass?

4. Charging in basketball – Charges in basketball are called way too frequently. It turns an athletic sport into a bunch of people falling down trying to get foul calls. It allows Glen Davis to be considered a decent defender. (If your best asset as a player is your ability to fall down, you should not be in the NBA) If it were up to me charges would only be called if the offensive player is totally out of control, uses unreasonable physical force or is in the restricted area. I don’t see how doing this wouldn’t improve basketball dramatically and immediately.

5. Traveling in the NBA- Does anyone know what a travel is these days? This is a rule that just seems to be arbitrarily called. Can you do jump stops where both your feet don’t hit the ground at the same time? Can you take as many steps as you want on a fast break? Are dribble rules disregarded entirely if your name is Lebron James or Derrick Rose? Rules should never be disregarded in some cases and that’s exactly what traveling seems to be in the NBA.