Johan
Santana’s no-hitter against the Cardinals last weekend has generated all sorts
of discourse about instant replay, incompetent umpires and asterisks. I got
into one myself with former big-leaguer @DougGlanville, Chicago sports blogger ChiTown
(@ChiTownSports), and an ESPN guy named T.J. Quinn (@tjquinnespn). Glanville had written about the “imperfections”
in baseball (http://ideas.time.com/2012/06/05/baseball-is-never-perfect/),
and how they’re a part of baseball lore (which is 100% true). What really caught my eye, though, was Glanville’s
opposition to instant replay. A former
player against something that would hold the umpires accountable and help keep
teams from getting hosed on a call? I
was surprised enough to add my two cents.
ME:
“I wonder if Armando Galarraga feels the same way.”
Galarraga,
of course, was famously robbed of a perfect game by umpire Jim Joyce a few
years ago. More on that below. Turns out, I wasn’t the only one who disagreed
with Glanville’s take.
ChiTown: Fans
pay see the 'human element' in players, not umpires.
Doug Glanville:
Good comment. But I think
people gained a different take after Jim Joyce.
ChiTown: I
appreciated Jim Joyce but I bet he would have appreciated replay.
T.J. Quinn: probably, but the way joyce and galarraga
handled it transcended sport.
So
there the hyperbole starts – the blown call “transcended sport.” Yes, both men
were classy and acted like gentlemen. Maybe it seemed so unusual because of the
Bob Davidsons and AJ Pierzynskis of the sport. But, really, all they did was
handle an awkward and embarrassing situation like a couple of mature adults. Isn’t
that expected of us on a daily basis?
Turns
out, Glanville wasn’t going there, anyway. His point was that he didn’t want
robot umpires taking over everything.
Well, we’re in complete agreement on that one. @ChiTown didn’t want robot umpires either. Our
point was for bad umpires to be held accountable for their many high-profile
mistakes, and for baseball to use available technology to eliminate as many of
those mistakes as possible. Quinn, however, went in a, um, different direction:
T.J. Quinn: I don't know what ultimately would be served by technical precision. But I know those men gave my kids something permanent.
Oh,
boy. Here we go.
Is
that not the most ESPN-type answer? Seriously? Did Gregggg Easterbrook write
this? PLEASE, WON’T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!? What would be served? Are you kidding me?
/Pauses,
counts to 10
/Takes
deep breath
Okay, here’s
what would be served: the game of baseball. That’s all. The “technical
precision” would ensure that critical plays are called correctly? That one team
isn’t getting screwed out of the playoffs by one umpire’s horrible call? That
baseball shows a willingness to step into the 21st century? Nah, never mind that stuff; let’s focus on family values. Hey, if TJ Quinn wants to
use Galarraga/Joyce as a teaching point for his children, bully for him. But you
don’t know what would be served by technical precision? That’s just ignorant.
We could get that kind of drivel from Mike Lupica.
It
reminds me of the media folks who got carried away and proclaimed that people
will remember the Galarraga/Joyce game in the same vein as a no-hitter or
perfect game. Of course, this reasoning is ludicrous. Near no-hitters and almost-perfect games don’t
end up in the record books or Cooperstown.
Just ask Harvey Haddix.
Look
at it this way: no matter what else Philip Humber does in his baseball career,
he will always be on the list of pitchers who threw a no-hitter. Armando Galarraga will not have his name on the
list of perfect games. I wonder, deep
down, would he rather have his name etched in baseball history, or be remembered
as a guy who got hosed out of a perfect game by an umpire’s mistake? Instant
replay would have made that question moot.
It also would have ended Santana’s no-hitter against the Cardinals.
Aside: I found the St. Louis
Post-Dispatch’s asterisk attached to Santana’s no-no hilarious. Watching the NY
media get all lathered up about it was equally amusing, as if they wouldn’t
have done something similar had the roles been reversed. Just face it, NY: you
got out-snarked this time. Deal with it.
Ken
Rosenthal wrote earlier this week about baseball’s interest in the Hawk-Eye
system, which is best known in tennis, where it makes a loud beeping noise when
a player’s serve misses the serve box. Is this a practical answer? I’m not
sure. At least it shows that MLB is considering doing something.
Meanwhile,
we’re stuck with horrible umpires like Bob Davidson, Joe West, Angel Hernandez,
Laz Diaz, and Adrian Johnson. The Mets and their fans get to celebrate Santana’s
no-hitter, which is great for them. The Cardinals sit and wonder “what if?”;
that is something that too many players and teams keep having to ask.
