MLB: A League Set in its Ways
Of North America’s four major team sports leagues — NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL — Major League Baseball has the most prominent reputation of being stuck in its ways, unwilling to adapt its product to better suit its modern day audience. A glaring example of these steadfast ideals is the fact that it was the last of the leagues to implement a video replay review system to help verify or overturn rulings made on the field.
In 2008, Major League Baseball decided to join their North American counterparts by making video review a part of professional baseball. Although at the time their review system was very limited — only home runs were reviewable — at least it was a white flag that showed its loyal fans that the league was in fact interested in getting umpires’ calls correct.
In the years that followed, the review system remained unchanged, much to the displeasure of most fans. In 2014, the league finally expanded their borderline pathetic review system by adding the “manager’s challenge”; a stroke of genius made famous by the National Football League. Even with this addition, judgement calls such as strikes and balls are still not made reviewable. There are few complaints on that front, as it would just lengthen the only game not played with a game clock. MLB fans were at least somewhat satisfied with the new review system, which seemed long overdue in a sport full of reviewable content. Yet a flawed trend in the system has become apparent.
Much like in other sports, in order to overturn a ruling by an official, evidence contrary to the ruling on the field of play must have been found. In sports such as football and hockey, this system has produced its fair share of suspect calls; however, no league is able to brag such a high percentage of these ‘suspect calls’ as Major League Baseball, whose review system seems incredibly inconsistent and at times even laughable. The good news for baseball fans is that there is, at least, the hope of justice.
The rule of conclusive evidence requires the replay to contradict the call on the field to such an extent that it is absolutely certain that the call was wrong. The purpose behind the implementation of this rule was to eliminate the discretion of officials, thus eliminating any grey area in rulings. The irony is that the exact opposite is achieved. Instead of giving discretion to the people with video review, the discretion is essentially given to the umpire or official, who is forced to make a tough call on the field of play with much less evidence. Either way, discretion calls are, and forever will be, a part of sport. Since eliminating them entirely isn’t possible, logic would suggest the best way to achieve the highest percentage of correct calls would be to put people most suited to make the calls in power: the people with video replay!
The system is flawed because, instead of giving the call to the people with numerous angles on any given play, with the benefit of slow motion, an official must make the call in real time with whatever sight-line they have available to them. An example of how this simple rule can affect a seemingly straightforward call occurred in game six of the ALCS between the Kansas City Royals and the Toronto Blue Jays. In the second inning, a ball hit to deep right field by Mike Moustakas was ruled a home run by an umpire situated approximately 350 feet from the ball’s landing place. The umpiring crew was unsure if the ball had exited the park cleanly or if fan interference played into its departure. The crew decided to ask for a video review decision from Major League Baseball’s replay team in New York. Upon review of the play, the original call stood due to the fact that there was inconclusive evidence that the ball was caught prior to exiting the park. In other words, the play was a close call, and instead of giving the power of discretion to the people in New York with slow motion video replay, the gut call was made by an umpire who had no chance of seeing the play from where he was situated.
The current review system in Major League Baseball relies far too heavily on the original call, so much so that an umpires’ discretion is trusted over the discretion of a team of umpires with the advantage of technology for the simple explanation that “there needs to be CERTAIN evidence that the umpire is incorrect”. The problem is this isn’t quite practical. There are few times a call in sports can ever be described as “certain”, but since it is established that opinion calls are a part of sports, I would much prefer the opinion call to be coming from whoever is most qualified/in the best position to get it right. The question is, why does MLB settle for using their second most qualified source to make the kind of calls that can cost a team a run, game, or in this case arguably a playoff series. Major League Baseball should eliminate the conclusive evidence rule, and instead implement a review signal which would be given by an umpire at the time of the play, without having to make a call one way or the other. Doing this would allow the disputed call to be made solely by the team of umpires in New York, who can use technology as well as their conjoined opinions to better the chance of making the correct judgement call. Instead of using video review to judge whether there is enough evidence to overturn an umpires call, the technology should be used for the sole purpose of determining whether the hit was a home run or not!
Main Photo:
