posted
So I was watching the Tigers Indians game tonight and saw Armando Galarraga robbed out of a perfect game. I'm not mad as a Tigers fan, since baseball isn't really my thing, but it still really bugs me.
I think things like this undermine the credibility of the sport in general. I think it undermines the value of statistics too. It was a perfect game. But it will never be in the stats books or the history books, and Galarraga just has to just suck it up and move on, probably his only chance ever, and it's gone. That sucks the joy out of it for me.
If someone told me, on any regular play, that the MLB or any major sports should overrule a bad call, I'd say no, because they can't go back and armchair ump every single call of every game, even if there are mistakes here and there, because they average out over a season. And that's fine.
But for something major, like a world series game, or a perfect game, why not? They do it for home runs. It's already pretty difficult for me to enjoy baseball because it's so boring, and it's even harder for me to enjoy it when exciting things do happen, but bad calls destroy them.
I'm a huge hockey fan, so bad calls or at least, disputed calls, are a facet of life. But at the end of the day I shrug them off because, especially in a game like hockey, where calls happen often and are a massive aspect of the game, they really do average out over the course of a game, or even a series, or a season. But hockey doesn't have anything like a perfect game in it. No other sport really does.
It just kills the joy. Meh. I'll have forgotten about this by the end of the weekend, but it's stuff like this that undermines the value of numbers in sports for me, and makes it hard for me to invest anything into the sport. A lot of Tigers, probably as a way to assuage their own rage over the issue, are saying "well, that's just part of the game," and yeah, I guess it is, though that actually strikes me as a pretty stupid reason when they could easily change the rule. I guess that's just one more reason why I don't particularly like the game. Oh well.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the long run, you'll have as many perfect games thanks to a bad call as you have almost-perfect games which were ruined by a bad call.
I sort of like the system where each team can request just a few reviews, but they are strictly limited on the number.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Speaking of Hockey, my dear dear flyers played a fantastc game tonight.
I hate how checking things with video replay slows down sports, and I'm not sure if I'd like there to be more accuracy at the expense of making baseball even more boring.
Posts: 856 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Make it like football. Three flags per game. No instant replay on strike/ball judgments. Or even one per game. If it's one per game, most coaches are going to wait until the very end of the game to use it, and at that point, they might not even get used at all. You might get ten or fifteen such calls a night over the course of thirteen games, and they might take three or four minutes a piece. Over the course of a 3 hour game, adding eight minutes isn't a big deal, and if it reduces the frustration from something like this, it's eight minutes well spent.
If it was a replay for every play, it would be ridiculous.
Either way I don't see the argument for not reversing this call. It would not effect the outcome of the game, and even the ump who made the call says he screwed up and feels absolutely awful about it. It's really just for the stat books, and everyone agrees it was a bad call, why not just reverse it? All of the arguments I see in favor of not reversing it are pretty silly circular arguments.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just now watched the play on youtube and it's a real shame. That was a blown call of the nth degree.
The umpire has admitted his mistake....and owned up to it. So, at least he knows he was wrong. But still...he cost a pitcher a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Very sad.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In hockey, I think contested scoring is rare enough that the reviews are justified. If it happened more often they probably should do something like Lyrhawn suggests. The overtime one last night fell to technicalities. The puck clearly didn't go in after it hit the post, and the Flyer that snuck it in did a great job. It was all about when the ref whistled (or decided to whistle, I guess). It didn't feel dirty. Indeed, there are very few times in hockey where a goal feels dirty. Often, penalties feel dirty, but there are more problems with penalties in hockey anyways (diving, anyone?)
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't mind it quite so much in hockey, because they review goals and usually get it right when they do. But penalty calls are going to go someone's way as often as they go against them, so they average out. It seems like they review more and more goals these days in hockey, and especially during the playoffs it felt a little cumbersome and annoying, but better that they get it right I suppose, especially when any single goal could potentially shift a series.
Word on the street is that Bud Selig is considering giving Galarraga the perfect game. Either way this will be historic. As either the biggest blown call in decades, or the first overruling ever.
Scratch that, Selig just announced he won't overrule it, but he will consider changes to the instant replay's use in baseball.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a sneaking suspicion that a lot of the statistics that people spout off about any given player or team, in any sport, and at any level, are inaccurate. Some of the statistics are obviously more inaccurate than others.
I base this on my dealings with the athletics office at the community college. I have a good understanding of the stat-collecting methods of all the coaches, for all the sports, at this place. Based on that experience over the last few years, I can expect a screw-up in some stats for even the simplest, most reliable stats. Heck, even the final score for one of our teams at a national event was incorrect because of a computer glitch. One that was easily noticeable on the final, printed result!
Posts: 1813 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doesn't that make singular statistics like a perfect game all the more important? Surely the rarest events in all of sports are more, or completely accurate.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The rarest events are probably more accurate, yes. And the majors leagues are probably more accurate than the minor leagues.
My original thoughts were spurred by the idea of credibility of statistics in sports. From my perspective, they're not very. For someone who feeds off of a professional-level organization, the statistics are much more credible. But I would still maintain that they're not completely accurate.
Posts: 1813 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
