ST. LOUIS -- So, let's begin today with a question: Should MLB institute instant replay?And, if you answered "yes" to that question, I have a follow-up: What sort of plays should be subject to review? Should replay be reserved for boundary home run calls -- whether the ball clears a fence, leaves the playing field, hits the foul pole or is touched by a fan? Or should it encompass all hard-to-rule plays, like close calls at a base or diving catches (or traps) in the outfield?
In the pages of The News Journal, we began exploring this issue back in November, when I spoke to Pat Gillick before the general managers meetings. Gillick planned to vote in favor of using replay for boundary calls and told me he thought a majority of GMs agreed with him. Lo and behold, the GMs voted 25-5 in favor of replay to help umpires make difficult decisions on home runs, and last week, MLB began taking steps to devise a replay system that may be in place by Aug. 1.
But, in the ninth inning here yesterday, Geoff Jenkins was robbed of a hit on a call that wouldn't have been subject to replay under MLB's proposed plan. Jenkins' fly ball was trapped, not caught, by Cardinals right fielder Ryan Ludwick. But second-base umpire Mike DiMuro ruled that Ludwick caught the ball, clinching a 3-2 Cardinals victory.
Still, most of the Phillies personnel that I spoke to -- from Jenkins to Charlie Manuel to assistant GM Ruben Amaro Jr. -- said they favor replay only on boundary calls. The concern, among many in baseball, is that opening replay for other close calls will further slow the pace of games that already are too long. As it is, MLB figures replay would only be needed about 10 times per season on hard-to-see home runs.
So, what do you think? Replay or no replay? Home run calls or all calls?
Go ahead. Discuss.
***
You just knew Kyle Lohse was going to pitch well yesterday, didn't you?We may never know exactly why things didn't work out last winter between Lohse and the Phillies. Lohse contends the Phillies never made another offer after he declined their first (three years, approximately $21 million). The Phillies insist Lohse's agent, Scott Boras, wasn't receptive to their attempts at further negotiations.
Draw your own conclusions.
Lohse allowed two runs in eight innings yesterday, but, really, where would Lohse fit in to the Phillies' rotation right now? Certainly, not in place of Adam Eaton, who continues to pitch well -- 2-2, 3.02 ERA in his last five starts, including a solid performance here yesterday.
***
Terry Francona's four-year record as Phillies manager: 285-363 (.440 winning percentage). Francona's record with the Red Sox over the past four seasons: 375-273 (.579), three playoff appearances and two World Series crowns, including in 2004 the team's first title in 86 years.
So, either Francona suddenly became a genius after moving to Boston, or the Phillies didn't give him a chance to win.
Bet on the latter.
"It was tough because our team was not built to really compete in our division," Amaro said. "It was a situation where, at the time, we were not in a position to give Terry the chance to have that kind of success. Just like in anything else, you're only as good as the cards you're dealt."
***
More later. For now, have a great Sunday -- and to all the dads out there, including mine back in central Jersey, a very happy Father's Day.
3 comments:
Hi Scott.
I love your stuff and subscribe to the RSS feed and I normally think you're right on - but Francona? C'mon. He was a little league coach in Philly. He learned A LOT after here and then was given - what - the 2nd largest payroll to work with?
There are tons of times I will side against Phillies ownership and management - but Francona was a mistake from the get go here. His babying of Rolen and Abreu went on to haunt them for years after his departure too.
Why shouldn't umpires have all the tools available to them to make correct decisions? Would it really slow the game that much to have a little camera nearby that an umpire could review important plays on? The players use all kinds of tape to do their jobs well. Why insist on having baseball be umpired worse than it could be in today's world?
As far as how far it would go, clearly reviewing balls and strikes would be too tedious right now. When things like MLB Gameday can be instantaneous registered and instantly viewable to umpires, perhaps it wouldn't slow down the game at all, but now it would. Correctly resolving a ball in play-- especially whether something is strike two or a grand slam-- would take a few seconds, about the amount of time it takes to throw the ball around the horn.
Games should be umpired accurately.
How frustrating was that game yesterday? I thougth Bruntlett shoulda scored.
Post a Comment