National League umpire Frank Pulli looks at the viewfinder of a television camera to watch the replay of Florida Marlins' Cliff Floyd's hit in the fifth inning off St. Louis Cardinals' pitcher Kent Bottenfield on May 31. Floyd's hit, which had been ruled by the umpires as a home run, was reversed by Pulli and ruled a double after the review.Colin Braley/Reuters
Major-league baseball is a bastion of traditionalism in which the human element – including the prospect of atrocious errors by the umpires – is part of the game's fabric and lore. And now baseball is heading, like all other major-league sports, and individual sports like tennis, toward expanded use of video review of umpire calls, probably for next season. It may feel to some that this triumph of technology runs counter to the game's spirit (and if baseball can't stand imperfection, what area of life is next?), but it isn't true; none of the arguments against it hold up.
We would like to be able to say that the game's alchemy and poetry will be altered and harmed. But really, why should it be? A bad call that turns the game in a wrong direction is a disaster. As announcer Bob Costas points out, if any 10-year-old watching at home can see on instant replay what the right call was, why should a crucial game, perhaps a World Series game, be decided on a mistake? (It's happened.) When people say errors are a part of baseball, they don't really mean a headscratcher from an umpire.
Some people say the game is slow enough as it is – the average game is almost three hours. On the other hand, managers will not be allowed to argue with umpires about anything that is reviewable. (No list of reviewable calls is available, but it won't include balls and strikes. It would almost certainly include close calls at home plate.) While the image of skipper Billy Martin scraping dirt together to throw at an umpire remains indelible for fans of a certain age, it's hard to see how the game would suffer by giving Mr. Martin a replay, instead.
Then there's the slippery-slope argument – that an electronic strike zone will ultimately replace home plate umpires (who each have their own way of calling balls and strikes). But that would be to throw out the human element; what baseball is planning instead is a complementary use of technology. A final argument is that acceptance of neutral arbiters and tolerance for their errors is an essential part of sportsmanship. But a video appeal will give the complainers much less to complain about. No need to throw dirt.