Play it again, Sam
On Friday, Skip Bayless filed a great piece in support of using limited instant replay in baseball, thus ensuring that calls are made correctly. One piece of evidence he uses against MLB is the home run Mike Lieberthal hit earlier this year against the Giants at CBP that -- replays clearly showed -- was not a home run.Now, rarely does a night pass when we don't see at least one lowlight of a highlight – a "you're blind, ump!" call. The Phillies' Mike Lieberthal was awarded a home run that even he later admitted didn't clear the fence. Replay! The Cardinals' Albert Pujols leaned into the stands to snag a foul pop after it clearly ricocheted off a Cardinals official sitting in a box seat. Replay! Apparently, the baseball gods have a sense of humor. The last out in yesterday's 5-2 loss to Oakland was made by Mike Lieberthal -- on a play where replays clearly showed he was safe. Now, I have always been absolutely in favor of instant replay -- in every sport. (Human beings are imperfect -- there is no disputing this. Why strictly rely on these imperfect eyes and ears to determine the outcome of games?) With MLB, I would have limited its use to determining if a ball was fair or foul, a home run or not, caught or trapped, and whether or not a tag was made. Now, however, I am in support of total use of instant replay in MLB -- from the aforementioned uses straight on through to balls and strikes, even. Umpires have egos, which is why players and coaches are ejected when they dare to disagree with an umpire's call on a pitch. However, when so many calls are missed and there is such variation between umpires -- indeed, between one umpire's own calls -- how can there not be instant replay for everything? The technology exists to make sure that all calls in every game are made accurately. How can anyone argue for it not to be used? Bonus: The title to this piece is a sly -- thank you very much -- joke about the umpires missing calls. Can anyone tell me what the joke is? |
Comments on "Play it again, Sam"