What Happens When Replay Goes Wrong?

It seems that officiating recently has gone from bad to worse. From the absolute brutal umpiring in the World Series, to the bad calls that we've seen in both college and the NFL this year, it seems as if the easy answer to fix these errors (pointing the finger my way also) is instant replay. Mike and Mike both agree (gasp... WHAT!?!) that instant replay should be implemented more into baseball and also to create a way to get around the whole no timeout thing in the NFL. Even PFT, which seems to be the "go-to" NFL blog weighs in at the Sporting News with this:

The easy fix is to go back to the old rules. So what if it takes a little extra time to get the call right? Too much is riding on the outcomes of these games to rush the process.

But if saving time still takes precedence over being accurate, why not make replay automatically available on any play when the question is whether a team scored, whether a turnover happened, or whether a first down was achieved? The challenge system can be maintained for all other situations.

At a bare minimum, the league should allow the booth to initiate replays with less than five minutes to go in each half.

But what happens when Replay goes wrong? You'd be amazed, but we've seen it happen many times. For instance, when Al Michaels will say something about how "they won't overturn this", and there's "not enough inconclusive evidence", and you the viewer seem to agree with him, but sure enough the referee emerges from his little review hideout to overturn the call and you wonder what angle he was even looking at. This past weekend, there was another case where the replay booth got it wrong! Over at The Detroit Free Press, Big Ten commish admits an error was made during the Michigan / Michigan State game:

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said the decision by a replay official to award Michigan’s Brandon Minor with a touchdown against Michigan State on Saturday, overruling the on-field referee’s call, was “not acceptable.”

Minor leaped to make a 19-yard catch from Steven Threet and landed out of bounds, causing the on-field referee to rule the play incomplete. The replay official overturned the call, saying Minor’s foot hit the pylon. According to NCAA rules, however, an airborne player that touches a pylon is considered out of bounds.

Will there be punishment?

“I haven’t decided yet, but we may,” he said. “I doubt if we do anything publicly, but there has to be an understanding that we expect on the field and in the booth 100% knowledge of the rules, applying the right rule to the right situation. You might make a mistake in terms of judgment, but I expect our officials to know the rules and apply the right rule to the right situation. We didn’t do that, and that’s not acceptable.”

Well... at least Delany is serious about fixing the problem. And thankfully this blown call did not affect the outcome of the game as Michigan State eventually won the game. But this is a reminder to all that think instant replay will fix the problem, sometimes even the replay guys get the call wrong.

Instant Replay in MLB by Next Season?

According to Jayson Stark at ESPN, we could possibly see instant replay in Major League Baseball as early as next season:

Major League Baseball is making tentative plans to experiment with instant replay in the Arizona Fall League, according to a baseball official with knowledge of those discussions.

If that experiment proves practical and successful, MLB then is likely to continue the experiment next March during the World Baseball Classic and spring training games.

If no insurmountable problems arise, baseball could begin using replay -- though only to decide home run calls -- as soon as next season.

A top baseball official confirmed to The Associated Press Thursday that he will formulate a proposal for instant replay, although he wouldn't put a timetable on a replay plan.

"The times are such that our fans are used to seeing all the high technology and they're used to seeing the other sports that use these systems to make determinations, and the fans are clamoring for all the sports to look at that," said Jimmie Lee Solomon, the sport's executive vice president for baseball operations.

What is yet to be determined is whether calls would be reviewed by a "replay umpire" in each stadium, as the National Football League does, or in the MLB offices in New York, a system that would more resemble the National Hockey League's.

I think starting with reviewing controversial home run calls is a good start. If you're wondering if calls like bang-bang plays at any base or home plate will ever be reviewed, my guess is no, or at least not in the near future. However, starting with reviewing possible home-run calls is a good start and could lead to future instant replay opportunities.

Another Case for Instant Replay in Baseball...

Via thesportingnews.com

The three-time [A-Rod] MVP connected off Garrett Olson (3-1) to start the third, then hit another ball over the wall in the sixth that was incorrectly called an RBI double.

It was the latest in a string of home run calls that have been blown by big league umpires lately, including one at Yankee Stadium on Sunday night. That's left some calling for instant replay in baseball.

This ruling didn't end up costing the Yankees, it just left A-Rod flipping his helmet at second base and shaking his head in disbelief.

"We made a mistake," second base umpire and crew chief Tim Welke said after seeing the television replay. "We want to be perfect. We weren't perfect tonight."

Instant replay in baseball? I won't believe it until I see it. In the meantime, we'll have to put up with it... which really sucks everytime a play goes the wrong way.

To remind you of what Jayson Stark says about Replay... here's what he said in a chat a few weeks back:

THE CASE FOR: Sheez, shouldn't this sport be embarrassed to get calls that basic so wrong? It would have taken those umpires less time to watch the replay than it took for them to huddle, then STILL get it wrong and then have to stand around listening to Phillies manager Charlie Manuel rant and rave about it.

THE CASE AGAINST: Bud Selig says he wouldn't want to do anything to tarnish the sacred ''human element'' that has prevailed in the umpiring business since long before replay machines, and even light bulbs, were invented. So ostensibly, introducing technology would destroy the ''charm'' of the game. Or something like that.

THE VERDICT: You've got to be kidding. As the reader who inspired this debate, Brian of Philadephia, points out, it's the 21st century. So it's about time baseball charged into the 20th century and turned on those replay monitors. Tell Bud Selig I'm 100 percent in favor of humans. But I'm more in favor of getting calls right -- especially calls like this one, which will hang over two division races all year.

Controversial Call Help The Cavs Win In Philly

Tonight in Philly... As time expired, the 76ers celebrated and left the court as they thought they had just beat the Cavs by 1 point. However, the refs went to the booth and reviewed the play to see if there was time on the clock when a foul was committed. From NBA.com:

The Sixers appeared to have won after Lou Williams hit a fadeaway jumper with 5.1 seconds left - his second go-ahead basket in the final minute.

Instead, Brown was fouled by Samuel Dalembert with only a couple of ticks left. The Sixers thought the game was over and ran off the court, while the refs huddled at midcourt to look at the replay. The Cavaliers stayed on the bench, with some peeking over and hoping to hear the decision.

After the play was reviewed for a few minutes, Dalembert was hit with his sixth foul. The Sixers had to come back and watch Brown stun them for the controversial win.

Via Sixers Journal:

That game was over ... The ref waived his arms and the the game was over. How in the heck can you go back to a replay to determine if they called a foul. On the post game show they defended the ref for making a foul call with 0.2 second left on the clock. I don't care! You don't make that kind of frickin' call at the end of a game.

That was to most bush league thing I have ever witnessed!
I could not stop screaming at my television set! Mo Cheeks and the Sixers took the high road. The refs made a call and they move on. The 76ers lose 91-90 to the LeBrons and are now locked into the 7th playoff seed and a match-up with the Detroit Pistons.

Now listen, I'm all for instant replay in sports. But I think what happened tonight in Philly is going a little overboard. I'm sure the Cavs are happy but if I'm a Sixers fan tonight - I'm pretty bitter with how this game ended.

That's two days in a row where the city of Philly was shafted by a controversial call. No wonder they're so miserable.

Update: After watching the highlights of this game, I now know the refs were not reviewing to see if there was a foul - they were reviewing the video to see if there was still time on the clock when a foul was called. The thing is, there was a foul before the clock showed all zero's, and the refs went to video evidence to see if it was called before or after the final buzzer. Dalembert knew he committed a foul - you could see it in his body language. The end result is that the Sixers feel they got screwed, but it's just bad luck. Who knows... with the playoffs right around the corner, maybe they can use this as something to rally around, and who knows... pull a first round upset of the Pistons.

Jayson Stark Discusses Instant Replay

I'm feeling sick today, so rather than read and disect - I'm just going to copy / paste the whole thing. This is taken from "That's Debatable", a chat with Jayson Stark:

Major League Baseball needs to allow for the review of controversial calls made by umpires. It's the 21st century. There's this new thing called instant replay that could help them review the calls that the umps messed up.

Jayson Stark: The Cubs' Mark DeRosa hit a baseball Sunday that curled around the wrong side of the foul pole. Every occupant of this planet who saw the replay knows that.

The bad news for the team he hit it against, the Phillies, is that the umpire who called that ball fair, Adrian Johnson, wasn't among the earthlings who got to look at that replay.

So is it time for baseball to point its umpires toward the nearest replay machine? Let that debate begin.

THE CASE FOR: Sheez, shouldn't this sport be embarrassed to get calls that basic so wrong? It would have taken those umpires less time to watch the replay than it took for them to huddle, then STILL get it wrong and then have to stand around listening to Phillies manager Charlie Manuel rant and rave about it.

THE CASE AGAINST: Bud Selig says he wouldn't want to do anything to tarnish the sacred ''human element'' that has prevailed in the umpiring business since long before replay machines, and even light bulbs, were invented. So ostensibly, introducing technology would destroy the ''charm'' of the game. Or something like that.

THE VERDICT: You've got to be kidding. As the reader who inspired this debate, Brian of Philadephia, points out, it's the 21st century. So it's about time baseball charged into the 20th century and turned on those replay monitors. Tell Bud Selig I'm 100 percent in favor of humans. But I'm more in favor of getting calls right -- especially calls like this one, which will hang over two division races all year.

Nevertheless, feel free to disagree. That's what ''That's Debatable'' is all about.