FanNation

RUGator said 12/20, 11:04 PM
The game is long enough. Introducing instant replay would prolong the game needlessly. How many significant calls do the umps get wrong overall? I bet it's pretty low. The few times it might change a game's outcome would not justify it's use all the time. Furthermore, as a "purist" (in an "impure" game?), I like the human element of imperfection. It adds to the game's appeal.

RUGator said 12/21, 09:53 PM
Is lengthening the game on a daily basis a price that most fans would be willing to pay for the chance that a call or two could be gotten "more correctly?"

Baseball has survived way more challenges than those potentially posed by "missed calls."
The scrutiny that umpires are under in this day of advanced technology is great enough. Adding more pressure not to make a mistake might in actuality cause them to think too much and have an even more negative impact on the more routine calls that make up the bulk of their duties. If MLB continues to get the best people and trains them accordingly, the game will proceed just fine. Worry about the performance enhancing drug issues and the financial inequities between teams rather than forwarding a misconception, namely that umpires are missing calls. It's just not happening to a degree to justify replay.

RUGator said 12/22, 06:26 PM
Baseball is one of the few sports without any time restrictions. Imposing instant replay would tamper with its special place amongst the four major sports, i.e., a certain amount to time for the umps to review, manager challenge rules, how would you determine what is reviewable. All of these potentialities all lead to a lengthened game. It's my contention that the single most important argument against replay in baseball is the time issue. With not time restrictions, adding another element would undoubtably make the games longer.