In Favor of Instant Replay

1 of 2

Armando Galarraga showed potential in 2008, his rookie year, posting a 3.73 ERA in 28 starts. But it has since gone unrealized, and he spent most of this past season pitching to minor leaguers at various levels of the Houston Astros’ system. Before the marginalized right-hander faded, though, he had his chance to enter the history books. On the evening of June 2nd, 2010, with the Detroit Tigers facing the Cleveland Indians, he retired the first 26 batters he faced. By turning rookie utility man Jason Donald into an out, Galarraga, an unlikely hero, would achieve the 21st perfect game in 135 years of Major League Baseball history.

Jim Joyce will live in infamy after one terrible call. (Jake Roth-US PRESSWIRE)

Unfortunately, perfection met the human element that night in the form of first base umpire Jim Joyce. In the batter’s box, Donald swung at an off-speed pitch over the outside part of the plate. He made faint contact and the ball rolled lazily to about halfway between first and second base. First baseman Miguel Cabrera ranged to his right, fielded, planted his feet and flipped the ball to Galarraga covering first for what looked like an easy out. The ball and the pitcher beat Donald to the bag by nearly a full step, but the umpire waved “safe!” The bewildered faces of Galarraga, Cabrera and even Donald, who put his hands on his helmet in disbelief, screamed what many of us were thinking: baseball needs instant replay.

Joyce, responsible for what fans will remember as one of the greatest sporting injustices of all time, admitted the error soon after. Choked up, he told reporters in a postgame press conference, “No, I did not get the call correct. I kicked the sh*t out of it.” He continued for over five minutes to lament his mistake to reporters, saying, “It was the biggest call of my career and I kicked the sh*t out of it.” But once he made the call, true reconciliation went well beyond his reach. In baseball, when it comes to blown calls, what’s done is done. Thanks to institutional stubbornness, Joyce will spend the rest of his life haunted by a single mistake.

Baseball does use replay, but only on possible home runs—to determine whether the ball left the field in fair territory, whether it cleared the fence and whether a fan interfered. The system is quick and effective; in 2010, after two full seasons of use, umpires had consulted video 123 times, resulting in 48 overturned rulings. In the interest of justice, rather than limiting the range of such useful technology, baseball executives should do all within their power to limit violations of equity. The need for baseball to finally accept technology is increasingly apparent considering 69% of U.S. households can see replays themselves in high definition.

Those who identify themselves as baseball purists or traditionalists heartily object, on the arrogant grounds that their game is beyond correction. Reid Forgrave of FOXSports.com, a member of this camp, wrote “Instant replay will kill one of baseball’s finest traditions.” True advocates of baseball purism, however, would not only call for the league’s contraction to fewer teams, the end of the designated hitter and the squelching of instant replay. They would also clamor for a return to the original “Knickerbocker Rules,” made in 1845, from which the current baseball rulebook has evolved. The inaugural set of written rules designated pitchers should toss the ball underhanded and the first team to 21 runs should win the game, with no innings limit. Obviously, the game has made positive changes since 1845, the year during which one could say baseball took its “purest” form.

If the traditionalist argument falls, dissenters assert this hypothetical change would simply not yield a positive effect on baseball. Their primary reasoning is baseball games, which already have a difficult time keeping the attention of casual fans, would slow even more with the addition of instant replay. Steven Hirsch of TheHuffingtonPost.com asserted, “The more managers protest, the more plays get reviewed, and the more games get prolonged.” Hirsch’s point, while seemingly intuitive, has its flaws. If the league expanded replay, the time taken to review close plays would only replace current wastes of time. With video review, much of the time it takes for managers and players to argue and for umpires to subsequently conference about their calls could be eliminated. Further, in some cases, like the one at the end of Galarraga’s perfect game that wasn’t, the correct call would have ended the game sooner than the incorrect one.

Perhaps the greatest argument in favor of instant replay is the aforementioned want for justice. Too much is at stake, too much money invested in teams which may need to win to stay intact, for outcomes to swing unfairly based on miniscule umpiring errors. Major League franchises each employ hundreds between their players and front office staffs. Each of them has plenty of fiscal interest in every game. A playoff loss impacts many pocketbooks directly, and, on a huge stage, the smallest mistake can turn fortunes the other way. Baseball should let the players, not the umpires, make those game-deciding mistakes. New York Yankees manager Joe Girardi summed up this argument after a few missed calls contributed to a loss in this year’s American League Championship Series. “Too much is at stake. We play 235 days to get to this point, and two calls go against us,” he said. “In this day and age when we have instant replay available to us, it’s got to change.”

New York Yankees’ manager Joe Girardi is a strong proponent of instant replay. (William Perlman/THE STAR-LEDGER via US PRESSWIRE)

Further, some contend, frustrating mistakes drive potential fans away from the game and cement its image as “an old-timers game.” A poll conducted by Harris Interactive in January revealed that just 13% of adults who say they follow a sport name baseball as their favorite. That represents a negative change of ten percentage points since 1985, more than three times the next-largest popularity drop-off over the same timeframe, that seen by men’s tennis. What was once America’s pastime, though still faring well, needs to appeal to a modern audience with short fuses and little tolerance for umpire mishaps. Embracing technology provides one way to accomplish that goal.

Most other major sports have already entered the 21st century, and few complaints are heard about time and tradition when those sports rectify errors by video review. The National Football League has had some form of an instant replay system in place since 1986, and their current system allows for replay in almost every situation. The National Basketball Association swiftly implemented instant replay after lack thereof cost the Los Angeles Kings a game in the 2002 Western Conference Finals. Today, NBA replay opportunities span a wide and expanding range of plays. The National Hockey League seems to successfully utilize their instant replay system to determine whether a puck crossed the goal line multiple times every night. It’s time for Major League Baseball to join the party.

I should note that, given the extreme difficulty of their jobs, major league umpires should be commended for their sharpness. I am not calling for baseball to replace them with robots. That said, I can think of no reason umpires should not have the option to consult technology when they deem it necessary. Some umpires agree, knowing replay could save them potential embarrassment and scorn. Don Denkinger, who umpired in the major leagues for 30 years and is best remembered for a critical blown call during the 1985 World Series, is one of those. “You want to get that right,” he said the day after Joyce’s mistake ruined Galarraga’s perfect game. “If you can’t get it right using officials, you should get it right by going to replay. That would’ve been very easy last night.”

I contend that baseball should allow for the possibility of overturning calls based on video replay on almost every type of call, with the exception of balls and strikes. Under an ideal system, as in every other professional sport, umpires would need to see incontrovertible proof in order to change their original call.

In order to limit the number of plays which go under review, saving time and the flow of the game, baseball could do a number of things. One option would be to utilize a challenge system, with each team allowed to request a certain number of reviews and losing challenges if they fail. Another would be to simply allow umpires to view replays at their discretion—when they themselves are unsure of a call. Baseball could also limit replay to plays involving only one runner, preventing confusion questions of where to place runners on an overturned call. Maybe replay would be limited to plays at first base or scoring plays.

No matter how it happens, something must happen. Thankfully, signs now point to some more open-mindedness on the part of Commissioner Bud Selig and his office. At the general managers’ meetings November 7th, discussion took place regarding expansion of video review to include fair or foul calls and traps in the outfield. They’ve also experimented with systems like the animation system currently in use to judge line calls in pro tennis and the TrackMan radar software used by the PGA Tour. If baseball expands replay even the smallest amount before the next season begins, it will be a victory for the game.

Home / Detroit Tigers News