Showing the umps slow-mo videos of their bad calls?

[MTR]

Dont even attempt it. Rules do not allow video to be used to review a call, and I seriously doubt any umpire would be willing to stick around after a game to review fans video footage.

Yep, no allowance for electronic review to determine a call. But I'm not totally against it as long as the umpire may have someone taping the game and every time the umpire is correct on a call questioned by anyone associated with the team, the lead coach and one parent will leave the property for the remainder of the game.

If at any time this cannot be acccommodated, the game is forfeited.

Deal?

 

[quincy]

That would be a deal with me. Both Teams would loss 2 or 3 adults then the game would be a lot more enjoyable for everyone.

I know that vast majority of the people will be around to watch the end of the game, myself included.

 

[Renntiger]

Because baseball and softball are games played by humans, and judged by humans. Umpiring is as much a skill as hitting is. Sometimes the batter hits the ball, sometimes the batter misses, sometimes the umpire is wrong, sometimes the umpire is right. The point is that every time the batter is trying his/her hardest to hit the ball, and the umpire is trying his/her best to make the right call.

-W

I didn't realize football and tennis are not played or judged by humans, or didn't require as much skills, or that the players and refs in those sports don't try as hard as those playing/umpiring baseball/softball.

Football and Tennis didn't always allow video review either. The same argument you are using had been used against the adoption of this dehumanizing technology in those sports as well, before the sanctioning bodies decided that accuracy in judging trumps whatever romantic notion one entertained about human fallibility.

If you are suggesting that baseball/softball is different, that it's a sacred institution that must be protected from technological encroachment, that there would otherwise exist a slippery slope between what we have now and some fat guy betting $5 on a TV exhibition game played between robots, then what do you make of what we are all doing here, hovering over our computers, connected to a network of strangers through the ether, sharing videos of players and scrutinizing their swings and pitches frame by frame?

Which is more dehumanizing and robotic - trying to find the perfect swing, and spending 10,000 hours in the cage to help your player perfect it, or making sure that the she actually beat the throw to first during a game?

Any tool can be abused. Obviously video review should not be used to challenge every strike or ball call, but there are instances where it could easily be used to settle a questionable call to everyone's satisfaction - such as during base running.

Field umpires are occasionally overruled when their error is too obvious to let stand, so judgment calls are not sacred even now, at least not between the umps themselves. What is the harm in removing all doubts in such instances (there are not that many of them in any given game) through the limited use of video review? How is a confirmation or an overrule through instant replay (which should shut everyone up) any worse than an overrule by the home plate umpire (which usually just shifts the angry shouts from one side of the stand to the other)? Would the game really change for the worse if everyone on the field and in the stands knows for certain that whoever is on base actually earned it?

 

[Bucketrider]

Since the umps are paid individuals, why not let their boss, the UIC see just how bad they may be. On the other side be sure to show the good umps also. I've seen some umps that should not even be allowed to watch a game let alone officiate. Of course I have never been very subtle, but if it walks like a duck.....

 

[starsnuffer]

Any tool can be abused. Obviously video review should not be used to challenge every strike or ball call, but there are instances where it could easily be used to settle a questionable call to everyone's satisfaction - such as during base running.

Field umpires are occasionally overruled when their error is too obvious to let stand, so judgment calls are not sacred even now, at least not between the umps themselves. What is the harm in removing all doubts in such instances (there are not that many of them in any given game) through the limited use of video review? How is a confirmation or an overrule through instant replay (which should shut everyone up) any worse than an overrule by the home plate umpire (which usually just shifts the angry shouts from one side of the stand to the other)? Would the game really change for the worse if everyone on the field and in the stands knows for certain that whoever is on base actually earned it?

Perhaps I was a bit harsh on my reference to video review in football, but that belongs in another forum.

Don't you think that the pace of softball, and especially baseball is already slow enough without the delays that would be caused by video review? Most of us are out playing games and tournaments with a set time limit that rarely allows the games to go the full 7 innings. More review by umpires would just mean less playing time for the girls. At the same token, we're trying to get softball a wider acceptance on TV in the college and NPF level, and slowing down the game would not really help in that regard.

As for the questionable calls during baserunning, I'll say the same thing I say to my girls when they get called out, "You're probably right, you probably were safe, but if you were faster, there wouldn't have been any question. Let's suck it up and run harder next time".

-W

 

[chinamigarden]

Not sure how Football and Tennis fits into this conversation. My HS football team has state of the art video equipment, but they don't get to use it to show the officials a missed call. The local CC has a very good tennis team, I don't see video replay being used there.

To compare our sport of softball and daddies using a 200 dollar video camera from 90 feet away with the NFL or the US open and major network video coverage, I guess I don't see the parallel. Even if MLB went to video review, it wouldn't end up applying to our game.

 

[chinamigarden]

Since the umps are paid individuals, why not let their boss, the UIC see just how bad they may be. On the other side be sure to show the good umps also. I've seen some umps that should not even be allowed to watch a game let alone officiate. Of course I have never been very subtle, but if it walks like a duck.....

The UICs know who the bad officials are and who the good ones are. If they could assign only good umps they would, but if they did that there wouldn't be enough umps to do all the games.

 

[Renntiger]

Not sure how Football and Tennis fits into this conversation. My HS football team has state of the art video equipment, but they don't get to use it to show the officials a missed call. The local CC has a very good tennis team, I don't see video replay being used there.

To compare our sport of softball and daddies using a 200 dollar video camera from 90 feet away with the NFL or the US open and major network video coverage, I guess I don't see the parallel. Even if MLB went to video review, it wouldn't end up applying to our game.

You are missing my point here. I had two questions, one was "can I show my video to the ump?", which was definitively answered in the negative straight away; my follow-up was more philosophical - "what would be so bad about having video review in baseball/softball?".

Football and tennis were used as examples of sports in which instant video review is permitted in cases of close plays, at least at the highest level of competition, for now. This is in contrast with baseball/softball, where such review is not permitted at ANY level, period. That was the only point I was trying to get across. Nowhere did I suggest that video review is common place in those sports at lower levels, nor have I compared softball daddies armed with video cameras to a bona-fide TV crew.

Everything evolves over time. If MLB sets a precedent by allowing video review during their games, who is to say that it won't eventually trickle down to us (perhaps not 'us', but those who come to the sport later on), especially if there is sufficient popular demand for such a measure?

In any event, technology marches on no matter what baseball/softball decides to do. Some of those $200 video cameras carried by softball daddies today can 'see' a lot better than the human eye, even from 90 ft away, and everyone can afford one. Like it or not, with the arrival of high speed cameras on the consumer market that can shoot at 300 frames per second, those sitting in the stands have suddenly gained a distinct edge over those on the field in terms of being able to see exactly what went on during very close plays, and this gap cannot be closed unless and until those on the field are allowed to adapt. It's no longer just a case of softball daddies THINKING that they can see better than the umps, now they have the tools to let them KNOW without any doubt whether the call was good or bad. This can make a qualitative difference in terms of how they react to the calls and view the performance of the umpires.

Anyway, this is not a pressing issue, if it could be called an issue at all at this point. Most softball daddies are too blasé to bring their cameras to the games; they have been conditioned to react to any unfavorable call with a few moderately audible snide remarks before moving on; and if their team happens to benefit from those same calls, they are likely to giggle sheepishly or stay very very quiet.

But things could change...

I just tossed the question out there to hear what others have to say regarding this topic. Thank you all for your input!

 

[Comp]

There are just to many what if plays that occur in baseball and softball to use instant replay for more than HR determinations, fair and foul and a few other minor things. Baseball and softball can just have to many things happening on a single play that all interconnect that if you changed one call somewhere in the action would have a cascading effect on everything else.

 

[MTR]

Field umpires are occasionally overruled when their error is too obvious to let stand, so judgment calls are not sacred even now, at least not between the umps themselves.

Well, that just isn't true.

What is the harm in removing all doubts in such instances (there are not that many of them in any given game) through the limited use of video review? How is a confirmation or an overrule through instant replay (which should shut everyone up) any worse than an overrule by the home plate umpire (which usually just shifts the angry shouts from one side of the stand to the other)? Would the game really change for the worse if everyone on the field and in the stands knows for certain that whoever is on base actually earned it?

No problem. Who is going to pay for the equipment, the licensing, the installation and operation? Who will pay for the daily maintenance and security? Then who will an the monitors? How will they communicate with those on the field and, btw, who is going to pay for the power used? And then there is the storage of the data.

Now, mulitply that by every field in the country. Be prepared for each tournament to limit the number of teams which will increase the cost per team, substantially.