Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, May 29, 2014

Robothal - Joe Torre On Replay Delays

It’s not really an issue now,” Torre said. “The only concern that we’ve seen in a couple of instances — and that there have been some warnings on — is going out there and using (the delay) for other reasons, to freeze a pitcher, to get a pitcher warmed up, stuff like that. That’s a concern because that’s gamesmanship. We said early on that we didn’t want that to take place.

boteman Posted: May 29, 2014 at 11:18 AM | 20 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: replay, time of game

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 29, 2014 at 02:39 PM (#4715472)

"It's not really an issue now"? I feel like I've seen Mike Redmond do it 50 times already.
   2. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: May 29, 2014 at 02:48 PM (#4715501)
One of the NBC guys mentioned this this morning. This was predicted by virtually everyone when the system was implemented. This is really simple to fix, if you leave the dugout you have issued a challenge. Or better still you have 30 seconds after the end of the play to issue a challenge.
   3. dr. scott Posted: May 29, 2014 at 03:03 PM (#4715529)
Torre is correct about the relatively small increase in the average time of games — through Sunday, the average was 3:02:14 for nine-inning games, or 3:23 longer than the regular-season average in 2013, according to Major League Baseball.

The average length of a replay, from the time a manager stepped on the field through the ruling being made, was 2:09. Such delays do not occur in every game — the sport was averaging just over one review every two games.


So official reviews are responsible for about 1 of the extra 3 minutes/game this year. From the article managers going out but not calling for a review is once every 4 games... so maybe adding 10 seconds to the average game.

where is the other 2 minutes coming from then? Is it just early in the year so this data is flawed or are we to expect a 2 minute increase every year... in 2000 the average length was 2 hours and 58 minutes and it dipped to 2 hours and 46 minutes in 2003. it increased to 2 hours 59 in 2013, a little over a minute a year, though most happened after 2007.

I will say this, the amount of time I sit and watch people screaming at each other seems to have gone down. I do find the replay system a more civil way to deal with missed calls, though I know its not always the case..

Another stat i found interesting. Only 25% of the replays definitively state the play was called correct. ~50% are overturned, and the other 25% are too close to overturn.
   4. Chris Needham Posted: May 29, 2014 at 03:19 PM (#4715558)
What they need is a stronger deterrent to stop managers from challenging non-obvious plays or for saying "what the hell, why not" on high-leverage plays. If it's 25% that are ruled correct, those are plays that never should have been challenged in the first place. And a large portion of the "no clear evidence" plays shouldn't ever be challenged either.

I kind of like the idea of ejecting the manager or fining or suspending him somehow. That'd cut down on the fishing expeditions, at least.
   5. dr. scott Posted: May 29, 2014 at 03:25 PM (#4715567)
What they need is a stronger deterrent to stop managers from challenging non-obvious plays or for saying "what the hell, why not" on high-leverage plays.


Yea, as right now with the current rules the managers could be playing it pretty optimally to make sure they get the most calls overturned. If not then these percentages will change on their own as people get used to the system. it will be interesting where the percentages lie at the end of the year. From what I have read they would have to change dramatically in the wrong direction for MLB to change anything more this year.
   6. Random Transaction Generator Posted: May 29, 2014 at 03:36 PM (#4715584)
In last night's Jays/Rays tilt, Flying Kevin Pillar dove at home plate to score the walk-off run for the Jays.
The catcher (not Molina I think, but the other guy) made a swipe tag at Pillar and (from the initial TV angle) might have gotten him.
The Jays had already poured onto the field to congratulate/assault Pillar (and then Gose who had the winning bunt/forced-error).
Theoretically, the Rays manager could have called for an instant replay to confirm the tag, but he had already used his challenge (and lost) earlier in the game.
(Subsequent replays showed that it wasn't really close, as one camera angle showed there was a lot of space between the leg/glove.)

Imagine how crazy things could have gotten if Maddon had been able to request a replay review?
They would have had to get all the Jays players off the field and back into the dugout, put Gose back on the bases, and then have the crowd sit and wait for it to be official.
   7. Fred Lynn Nolan Ryan Sweeney Agonistes Posted: May 29, 2014 at 04:07 PM (#4715612)
Imagine how crazy things could have gotten if Maddon had been able to request a replay review?
They would have had to get all the Jays players off the field and back into the dugout, put Gose back on the bases, and then have the crowd sit and wait for it to be official.

Somewhere, Fred Merkle nods approvingly.
   8. Chris Needham Posted: May 29, 2014 at 04:27 PM (#4715637)
So does Brett Hull.
   9. Kurt Posted: May 29, 2014 at 04:33 PM (#4715643)
6 - You'd think if Maddon requested a review, the ump could have pointed at the ball, sitting on the ground next to the catcher where he dropped it, and that would be the end of it. Your larger point I agree with, though.
   10. Eddo Posted: May 29, 2014 at 04:41 PM (#4715652)
where is the other 2 minutes coming from then?

Could the fairly massive increase in defensive shifting play a part? Each shift probably takes 5-10 seconds, and the pitcher will, of course, wait for the defense to get in place before standing on the rubber.
   11. madvillain Posted: May 29, 2014 at 05:03 PM (#4715682)
Could the fairly massive increase in defensive shifting play a part? Each shift probably takes 5-10 seconds, and the pitcher will, of course, wait for the defense to get in place before standing on the rubber.


Along this, how many teams are currently employing a 13 man pitching staff? Lotta pitching changes these days.
   12. dr. scott Posted: May 29, 2014 at 05:10 PM (#4715689)
Could the fairly massive increase in defensive shifting play a part?


Interesting question. I certainly don't notice it, but mostly because the TV rarely shows defensive positioning, but an extra 5 seconds per half inning is more than a minute.

Is there a record of breakdown on timing of games? Are there more AB's or are AB's taking longer... are there more delays or are delays taking longer. Is there more time between innings? One extra 15 second commercial/half inning would be more than 4 minutes/game.
   13. A triple short of the cycle Posted: May 29, 2014 at 05:51 PM (#4715709)
I noticed the Tigers make a simple yes-or-no (thumbs up or thumbs down) call, as to whether they want to challenge or not, after someone looks at the video right away as the manager strolls out to discuss the call with the umpire. Saw this on TV during the A's game, it was Scherzer in the dugout who got the call from the video guy and then flashed the thumbs-up to Ausmus.

The A's on the other hand seem to have a graduated scale. They have color-coded and numbered flash cards (!), such as the green #5 card I saw which, assuming a 1 to 5 scale, means HECK YES we should appeal that.

Anyhow - the teams that challenge are doing so because they have just watched videotape evidence that led them to believe the call would be overturned. In the games I've watched, the slow-mo videos typically show the umpire did in fact miss the call, and so the challenge was a good idea. However, the umpires nevertheless uphold the call more often than not ("inconclusive evidence"), which typically perplexes the game announcers and no doubt the challenging team.

We really need to understand what the review officials are seeing, and how they are coming to a different conclusion than everyone else. It really seems like they are not be watching the same video evidence that the challenging team has just reviewed. The fact that MLB keeps it all a big unaccountable secret is really suspicious.

This has been biting the A's in the ass a lot. Not sure how they are doing relative to the league, but the A's are losing their challenges (and thus their ability to challange again) quite often, on calls they were seemingly correct to challenge.


(Edited for grammar.)
   14. Random Transaction Generator Posted: May 29, 2014 at 07:49 PM (#4715775)
You'd think if Maddon requested a review, the ump could have pointed at the ball, sitting on the ground next to the catcher where he dropped it, and that would be the end of it.


Good point about the ball. I missed that during the initial playthrough.
   15. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: May 29, 2014 at 11:15 PM (#4715898)
This is really simple to fix, if you leave the dugout you have issued a challenge. Or better still you have 30 seconds after the end of the play to issue a challenge.

Both good suggestions.

----------------------------------------

Anyhow - the teams that challenge are doing so because they have just watched videotape evidence that led them to believe the call would be overturned. In the games I've watched, the slow-mo videos typically show the umpire did in fact miss the call, and so the challenge was a good idea. However, the umpires nevertheless uphold the call more often than not ("inconclusive evidence"), which typically perplexes the game announcers and no doubt the challenging team.

Most of the time I've heard announcers seem to understand the position that a truly slam-bang / 51-49 call should be upheld, regardless if it's 51-49 or 49-51. If that weren't the case, we'd probably have even more challenges than we have already.

IMO a "bad" call should have to be bad on an almost "duh" level to be overturned, for the simple reason that this standard best discourages nitpicking challenges that will eventually drag baseball down to the NBA's or NFL's level, complete with long commercials while the referees look at the videos from 15 different angles.
   16. boteman Posted: May 30, 2014 at 12:15 AM (#4715917)
If NYC can't make a conclusive determination within 30 seconds, the call stands. This eliminates the incentive to challenge very close plays that often stand anyway, while speeding up the whole sordid mess. Everyone wins.
   17. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 30, 2014 at 01:11 AM (#4715930)
If NYC can't make a conclusive determination within 30 seconds, the call stands. This eliminates the incentive to challenge very close plays that often stand anyway, while speeding up the whole sordid mess.

There are some plays that you can't tell until you get the right angle, which might be the 2nd or 3rd angle shown. Even then, you may need the slow-mo to be sure. A 30 second rule puts too much importance on which angle is pulled up first, even providing an incentive to manipulate that. We could do without replay, but if MLB is going to use it, they should take the time to actually review whatever the best visual evidence shows.
   18. boteman Posted: May 30, 2014 at 09:33 AM (#4715993)
If it requires that much time and effort, then it is likely that the original call was either correct or too close to call. The objective should not be absolute (unattainable) perfection, it should be to reverse sloppy calls. You know, like Galarraga's (im)perfect game courtesy of Jim Joyce.

If MLB refuses to install a sensible replay system, leaving us instead with this half-a$$ed arrangement, then its flaws should not grind the game to a halt. Force the issue by setting a time limit on how long the reviews can take to cut out the noise.
   19. bobm Posted: May 31, 2014 at 03:43 PM (#4716587)
[11]

2014: (2406+2394) / (810+818) = 2.95 GR/GS
2013: (2270+2359) / (786+836) = 2.85 GR/GS

                          
         Split    G Year
         MayGS  818 2014
         MayGR 2394 2014
   April/MarGS  810 2014
   April/MarGR 2406 2014

         MayGS  836 2013
         MayGR 2359 2013
   April/MarGS  786 2013
   April/MarGR 2270 2013


Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Play Index Tool Used
Generated 5/31/2014.
   20. cardsfanboy Posted: May 31, 2014 at 03:58 PM (#4716593)
If it requires that much time and effort, then it is likely that the original call was either correct or too close to call. The objective should not be absolute (unattainable) perfection, it should be to reverse sloppy calls. You know, like Galarraga's (im)perfect game courtesy of Jim Joyce.

If MLB refuses to install a sensible replay system, leaving us instead with this half-a$$ed arrangement, then its flaws should not grind the game to a halt. Force the issue by setting a time limit on how long the reviews can take to cut out the noise.


Mostly agree with boteman here. Also agree with the Yankee Clapper that a set time limit puts too much importance on which angle comes up first. Sometimes a person(reviewer) is going to know that a different angle will give them the answer and needs only a few more seconds, in that case it's perfectly fine. It's about training the guys to focus on speed, if you can't get what you need in a reasonable time, the call stands. Don't hunt for that perfect angle, but if you are pretty sure that another angle will get you the view you need, but it's going to make it 45 seconds...then do it. Once in a while, a long review isn't a bad thing, but it shouldn't be the norm.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
James Kannengieser
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogAngell: The Best
(30 - 8:23am, Nov 01)
Last: Tony S

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-31-2014
(28 - 8:13am, Nov 01)
Last: God

NewsblogBlue Jays to play Reds in Olympic Stadium on April 3 and 4
(4 - 7:50am, Nov 01)
Last: God

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(709 - 7:08am, Nov 01)
Last: Norcan

NewsblogA Visit to Madison Bumgarner Country, and a Proud Father's Home - NYTimes.com
(4 - 6:29am, Nov 01)
Last: Golfing Great Mitch Cumstein

NewsblogDeadline: World Series Ratings: Game 7 Scores Home Run For Fox
(41 - 6:24am, Nov 01)
Last: Chip

NewsblogRelix: Watch the Exact Moment the Phish Crowd Found Out the Giants Won the World Series
(8 - 5:15am, Nov 01)
Last: A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose)

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(1025 - 4:35am, Nov 01)
Last: The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott)

Newsblog2014-2015 MLB free agent power ranking
(28 - 3:40am, Nov 01)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(4911 - 3:37am, Nov 01)
Last: Ron J

NewsblogAFL Saguaros at Rafters
(6 - 2:17am, Nov 01)
Last: Gold Star - just Gold Star

NewsblogStatcast: Gordon stops 90 feet from tying Game 7
(33 - 2:14am, Nov 01)
Last: odds are meatwad is drunk

NewsblogJoe Maddon is to become Cubs manager, sources say
(142 - 12:42am, Nov 01)
Last: Andere Richtingen

NewsblogSan Francisco Giants at Kansas City Royals - October 29, 2014 | MLB.com Box
(92 - 12:18am, Nov 01)
Last: S.F. Giangst

NewsblogMLB.com - In pursuit of Maddon, Cubs dismiss Renteria
(19 - 11:22pm, Oct 31)
Last: HMS Moses Taylor

Page rendered in 0.3653 seconds
53 querie(s) executed