|re: More examples of instances where instant replay would have worked.|
There are lots of instances where instant replay will work. I even said as much in Response # 8 when I suggested they use something like "Instant Replay will be used to determine a Catch vs. a Trap except when there are runners on base."
The problem exists in all the other myriad of instances where it won't work.
Everyone talks about "instant replay" as if the answer is Yes or No when in reality it's an essay question. You have to look much, much deeper into the issue.
Let's look at the alleged "double play" from last night where Utley was called out. Taken in isolation, you could certainly reverse that call, put Utley on 1st and have the inning continue with 2 outs. That's pretty cut and dry.
Now let's expand on that situation and put a runner on 3rd. The force at 2nd is out # 2 and the incorrect call at 1st is out # 3. Everybody walks off the field, including the runner who was on his way from 3rd to home.
To set the stage for what's coming up, let's assume the call at first had been made correctly. Out # 2 is made at 2nd, Utley is safe at 1st but the play is not yet over. The runner at 3rd now attempts to score. The first baseman throws the ball to the catcher, putting into a place a whole bunch of possibilities.
1 - The runner could be tagged out
2 - The tag could be missed and the runner scores
3 - The ball could be overthrown and not only does the run score but Utley advances to 2nd
4 - etc.
OK, we all know the wrong call was made last night, so let's reverse it, keeping in mind that we added the runner on third who is now in the dugout.
The runner at 2nd is still out, but Utley is safe at 1st. The runner that was on 3rd comes out of the dugout looking to you to tell him where to go. Do you know if he would have scored had Utley been called safe in the first place? Do you know if he would have been tagged? Do you know if the ball would have been overthrown? Nope...you don't, so you don't know where to put him.
So how do you write the Instant Replay rules? You can't possibly account for every situation involving base runners, the number of outs, etc. when you write the rules. How would write the rule that allows you reverse the isolated Utley call but also accounts for those cases where there is a runner on 2nd or 3rd at the time?
re: In response to razor's comments I would prefer that umpires use instant replace when a manager calls for it and if, after viewing the tape, they reverse the call just place the players where they would have been had the correct call been made originally.
How do you know where the players would have been? That has been my argument all along.
Please refer to the example I gave much earlier in this about the runner on 3rd and fly ball to right. Do you know for a fact whether or not the runner on third would have tagged up on a catch or stayed on the bag? That would depend on the speed of the runner, the arm strength of the outfielder, how many runs ahead or behind the team was at the time, etc. So many factors enter into the decisions made by the players that it would be impossible to know where the players would have been if the correct call was made.
Sure, there are instances where the placement is cut and dry - your ground rule double is a perfect example - and that is why they are sent back. There is no question as to how many bases they should be awarded. There is no decision that you would have to guess at.
re: The article I linked to suggested that each team might be given two opportunities to call for a viewing of the tapes per game. That would be a good place to start.
That has nothing to do with the issues I have presented.
Whether the teams get to decide when to throw the challenge flag or the umpires say "I'm not sure I made the right call" or an official in the booth buzzes down to field or God sends a lightening bolt down to alert everyone, the issue of how to figure out what might have happened would still exist. How you decide what initiates the review has nothing to do with what you do after the review.