MLB considers instant replay, pros and cons up for debate

10/23/09 - Everybody loves to see an instant replay. Whether you're a diehard or a casual fan, it doesn't matter: if there's a great play or a close call, you want to see it again. This is why shows like Sportscenter are so successful. People want to see a great play or close call over and over again. It's an undeniable fact. Conversely, the truth of a play can also be revealed during a replay and therein lies the true essence of a major sports debate. During the current Major League Baseball postseason there have been a ton of over-exaggerated blown calls, most recently, controversial calls were made by the umpires in game four of the Yankees and Los Angeles Angels American League championship series.

In Tuesday night's game four, the Yankees romped the Angels 11-1. However, there were a couple of absolutely botched calls and they were mostly in the Yankees favor. Outfielder Nick Swisher was clearly out right in front of the umpire on a pickoff play at second base. Then there was the double play at third where the umpire called just one of the runners out when they were both tagged out off the bag.

Now, these calls probably wouldn't have determined the outcome of this particular game, but what if it was a one-run game?

This incident once again sparks the debate of whether or not the MLB should extend its replay review to all close plays rather than just close homerun calls.

Instant replay varies amongst professional and college sports. Personally, I think the NHL has the best review course of action. If a goal looks to have been kicked in or there was a high stick when the goal occurred, then the referee simply skates over to the booth and an NHL official in Toronto determines the call through replay. This process typically takes a minute or two.

The NFL version gives coaches the opportunity to challenge a play twice during a game by throwing a red flag on the field when they feel the referee made a bad call against them. Any play under two minutes in the second or fourth quarter can be reviewed by the officials if it's close. This system is somewhat flawed, since coaches can run out of challenges, but it typically doesn't hold up the game.

The NBA reviews buzzer-beating shots that occur before the half or at the end of the game. The referees just walk over to the official's table and look at the replay a few times. College basketball has the same policy, but also reviews whether a player's foot is on the line during a three point shot.

Replay review for the most part works in these particular sports because it doesn't hold up the game. But baseball is already a slow sport and can be agonizingly long, particularly because the umpires barely call strikes these days. Games typically last over three or four hours and in the playoffs, games are longer due to extra commercial advertising. So do we really want to see replay in the MLB?

On the one hand you have the argument that umpires are frequently missing calls that are affecting the outcome. On the other hand, there is the argument that baseball is slow enough and doesn't need anything to extend the time of the game.

While both of these arguments make sense, I think it can be simply resolved if there were a few officials whose job was just to watch a replay of a close play and let the umpires on the field know what the right call was. This seems simple enough to me and is a system very similar to the NHL.

However, what would happen to the game if you take out human error? The games could become less controversial, they could become slow and boring and overall the games could draw less interest. In other words, why can't the call just be the call?

I'm not sure if I agree with this argument or not, because I wouldn't want to see a team win the World Series on a blown call. But it does bring about a great discussion topic. Think about it: if all plays were reviewed, would the games become less exciting since the game would be slower? Would the overall rhythm of the game become completely thrown off if there is a review every other inning?

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I do know that controversy is what makes sports great. It gives the fans something to gripe about and gives the media something to debate. I believe partial replay review systems work and without referee error, something would be missing from the games.

Depending upon how the umpires call the World Series will determine if MLB will seriously look into expanding their policy. To steal a Seinfeld analogy, if you want to knock a soda machine over, you have to rock it back and forth a few times you can't just push it over. MLB Commissioner Bud Selig doesn't want to change replay, but the current postseason might have rocked the replay psyche of the MLB, and more blown calls in the World Series might result in a changed policy.