What's the rush????

[Guest AG/DC]

You seem to be arguing against the very sensible notion of doing it for disputed homer calls because of the less sensible ideas that might spring from that, which is an argument to never do anything.

What do you anticipate will be the unanticipated consequences of instituting video review of home-run calls in the post-season?

[nymr83]

CBS reporting MLB's in-season experiment with replays starts thursday.

[metirish]

Will it be like football where the ump will go under the black cloth to view tape?

[HahnSolo]

AG/DC wrote: Well it's only happening for disputed homers, so who are you arguing with?

Once you add it, eventually its role will expand. If there is replay, even only for disputed HRs, then we have another Denkinger incident in the late innings of a deciding WS game--one that is not changed--all of a sudden the calls will come in for replay on close plays on the basepaths.

[Guest AG/DC]

Maybe. So what? I'd advocate that a complex enhancement like that be done deliberately and carefully after due experimentation. This isn't that. bit ratjer a clear and simple enchancement. And to cling to disastrously blown calls in order to immunize against that just doesn't make sense.

Is it a preferable thing that Derkinger blew a team and city's World Series vicotry? He's a lone man turning point keeping Whitey Herzog out of the Hall of Fame.

[Frayed Knot]

HahnSolo wrote: ="AG/DC"]Well it's only happening for disputed homers, so who are you arguing with? Once you add it, eventually its role will expand. If there is replay, even only for disputed HRs, then we have another Denkinger incident in the late innings of a deciding WS game--one that is not changed--all of a sudden the calls will come in for replay on close plays on the basepaths.

Yup.

Also, the implementation and initial uses of these things never goes as smoothly as imagined.