Why replay on Dobbs non-HR wasn't necessary
Look to the NFL for the reason.
Why replay on Dobbs non-HR wasn't necessary
Rich Hofmann, Daily News Sports Columnist
The world that orbits around the Phillies is still talking about the call on Friday night, when Greg Dobbs' extra-inning, potential gamewinning bomb against the Red Sox was ruled a foul ball by first base umpire Jim Joyce. The ball was high, so high, that it was higher than the top of the foul pole in rightfield. There has been talk about how long Joyce took to make the call, about how they had to go to replay on a play that close, and how this is a sign of the typical arrogance that baseball umpires have exhibited forever.
Well, no.
My guess is that he didn't go to replay because there is no earthly camera angle that could tell you if the call was right or wrong. Because, you know, there isn't.
The NFL has the same issue with field goals. They do not tend to be controversial plays, and field goals were not reviewable at all until recently. But there was a wacky one a couple of years ago, one that hit the curved base of the upright oddly and bounced back onto the field of play. The officials eventually got it right but, after that, replay was instituted for field goals.
Except in this case, from the NFL rulebook:
Non-reviewable plays include...Field goals that cross above either upright without touching anything.
The reason is simple: there is no way to tell. There is no camera on earth that can pinpoint the location of the ball at the instance it crosses over the upright. (Well, maybe if they had a camera embedded in the upright, pointed skyward -- but, I mean, come on. Even then, I'm not sure you could tell.)
The NFL won't even allow its officials to take a whack at that one on replay because there is no chance the camera can tell you for sure -- which is the standard you need in order to change the call. Baseball's standard is the same, by the way.
Might Joyce have gotten it wrong? Yes, he might have. But replay could not conceivably have offered evidence either way to overturn the call on a ball hit that high over the foul pole. So if that's the case, if there was no possible way to overturn it, there was no reason to go to replay.
It just would have been a waste of time.
Yes a camera straight up WOULD tell you, as long as the camera is oriented right.— libertyof76- They need taller foul poles. Perhaps ones that can extend vertically like a telescope.— awallack
Comment removed.- If they can not review a replay when asked than end the use of replay.— jpelle36
- Frame by Frame on my DVR shows the ball dissapearing behind the foul pole on the way down. I am no engineer but based on the camera angle I believe that this fact confirmed the ball was fair.— JPMaine
- I am kinda confused here..we are in the 21st century right? Isn't there enough technology to extend the foul pole higher on the review screen and see if the ball passed on the left or right of it, or if it would have hit the pole? Pretty simple task right? The play should have been looked at. With the game on the line, it was too close for that ump to be as arrogant as he was and just shrug it off.— jphil
- The key difference between a FG in football and a homerun in baseball, that is not even considered in this post is that the refs are standing directly beneath each upright to determine if the football goes through the uprights, whereas the umpire is only standing on/near the line. The bottom line is, it would've depended on which camera angles the umpire was able to review, so there's a chance it would've helped and there's a chance it wouldn't have helped.— BJG83
- Comment removed.
- i was sitting up high... fair ball... no doubt— EndTheDrought
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Give it a rest! Game's over. Phils lost. You are all starting to sound like football fans, complaining about every perceived incorrect call.— junethe4th
- Rich - I disagree with you here - COMPLETELY. First of all, comparing the foul ball to a field goal is like comparing apples and oranges, though I understand your desire to go that route. Maybe it's time to insert officials down the lines in baseball, i.e., right smack in the middle of the fair pole area, like hockey, ONLY much more accurately placed...Don't tell me it can't be done either... Oh, wait, how about this to knock your socks off? Because I'm sure nobody wants to deal with taller FAIR poles, a laser/light beam that extends from the top of the pole to the top of the stadium, if not higher...It could be rigged so that when the ball crosses the plane of the beam (a FAIR ball), a siren goes off signifying a HR... In football, the referees stand beneath the goal posts and do, in fact, have the view to which you refer and dismiss...Oh, and by the way? Why the HELL can't they install cameras in the tops of the goal posts (or the FAIR poles, for that matter)??? They can put a camera in the goalie's head; in the ump's head; the catcher's head; the flower beds down the lines; Rich, it is 2009. The telephone still freaks me out...AND poker is now played by 50 million people a day BECAUSE of the camera that shows our hole cards on TV - so don't tell me that SOMETHING can't be done to rectify this! PK PS - Do I think this one loss WILL hurt our season? Probably not; HOWEVER, that it COULD makes your conclusion unacceptable to those of us who play, coach, officiate, watch and analyze sports with the integrity of the game on the line every day.— PhillyTheKid
- This article was a waste of time. Instant Replay is used for what? REPLAYS!!!!! Boston Sucks!— fman727
- Junethe4th - Nice post - idiot.— PhillyTheKid
