Selig won?t overturn call that cost Galarraga perfect game. The commissioner reversed George Brett's pine tar homer. This one is more worthy.

I'm not trying to get nit-picky with you, but it was the American League president, Lee McPhail, who upheld a Royals protest.

Never said it was Selig now did I.

Weasel Alert! Clintonesque moment!

George Brett's pine tar homer was a rule interpretation. Galarraga's third out was a judgement call. It would not be appropriate to overturn a judgement call, erroneous as it was, because this precedent would generate an unmanageable amount of appeals. I would favor an instant replay rule similar to that in football, but each team would get a certain number of replay appeals with no penalty if the finding is not in their favor.

Spider - not only that, but McPhail overturned what was really the correct interpretation. Brett was batting with an illegal bat. Not only that, but he had been warned about it before.
I like leaving the human element in the game. Television replay slows the game down and rarely changes anything. Might as well have the viewers call in and vote on the call.
A long time ago an umpire said "There's balls and there's strikes, and I calls 'em the way I sees 'em." Later an umpire changed that to "There's balls and there's strikes, and I calls 'em the way they is!" But the version I always used when I was umpiring is "There's balls and there's strikes, but there ain't nothin' UNTIL I calls it!" Once the umpire called him out - he was out. Who got to the bag first was immaterial at that point.

Originally Posted by M Richardson

Spider - not only that, but McPhail overturned what was really the correct interpretation. Brett was batting with an illegal bat. Not only that, but he had been warned about it before.
I like leaving the human element in the game. Television replay slows the game down and rarely changes anything. Might as well have the viewers call in and vote on the call.
A long time ago an umpire said "There's balls and there's strikes, and I calls 'em the way I sees 'em." Later an umpire changed that to "There's balls and there's strikes, and I calls 'em the way they is!" But the version I always used when I was umpiring is "There's balls and there's strikes, but there ain't nothin' UNTIL I calls it!" Once the umpire called him out - he was out. Who got to the bag first was immaterial at that point.

Actually, M, I agree with you. I've always said that the official in any sport is just another factor like the weather or the fans, and dealing with close calls is part of the game. As a once prominent college wrestling official friend of mine used to say when a coach would accuse him of blowing the match for a kid: "If you had done your job and taught him to counter that takedown/make the right choice of top or bottom/get in better shape/ etc./etc., my call wouldn't have mattered."

Originally Posted by RYou

I'm not trying to get nit-picky with you, but it was the American League president, Lee McPhail, who upheld a Royals protest.

Never said it was Selig now did I.

Ummm, you said "the commissioner" and it wasn't the commissioner that changed that call it was the American League President.