« Still Deferred: Stewart Lansley on the American Dream | Main | A Sizzling Debate: Marta Zaraska on Lab-Grown Meats »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

William Rey Worley

In Harry Bruinius's article, he develops his stance that the use of instant replay in baseball has resulted in a noticeable effect. Bruinius argues that baseball was surrounded by disputed calls made by umpires, commonly, the umpire's call would cause "conniptions" or fits in the crowd and players because they felt the umpire's decision was wrong. Bruinius points out that people would contest the calls of umpires and in response to this, the sport has now implemented instant replay to show defiant prove of the backing of umpire calls. Counter to the idea that instant replay reduces the "mystical" aspect of the sport, Bruinius presents the idea that people feel that such advancements will not change the excitement behind the game and could actually be a one of the best things to happen to the sport, instant replay could result in a decrease in incorrect calls and lead to a better experience for players.

I agree with Burinius's stance that instant replay has had a big effect on baseball. He describes how umpires are constantly berated and contested for their calls, then goes on to urge that after the implementation of instant replay, umpires are now able to justify their calls with evidence. I feel that this is a great advancement both for the integrity of the game and the credibility of umpires. In sports, officials such as umpires in baseball and referees in football are able to control the way a game turns out in many ways depending on the calls they make. Without instant replay, umpires would be making calls depending on what they believe and fans and players would just have to go along with what they said. Yet, with instant replay, fans and players are able to see reasoning behind and evidence for the calls an umpire makes. Because umpires have such a great effect on the outcomes of games, the implementation of instant replay has added to the uniformity in rulings and the support of fans behind umpires.

Gabriell Tuazon

In Harry Bruinius's article, "As baseball lumbers toward instant replay, will something be lost?", he talks about the controversy of the proposal of high quality instant replay. Two stances that he has given is on one side are "objectively gathered data: clean, precise, and ostensibly reliable and true", and on the other "are the wild and unreliable vicissitudes of human passions". He begins his article with calls from the umpire and the reactions followed. Then we infer that Baseball has the history of many responses and fits from both the crowd and the baseball teams because of the examples he gave. Bruinius also points out that the debatable calls by the umpires are part of baseball's "Human Element" and that this is what creates the wild and fun components of the sport. The instant replay aspect allows us, the audience, to see frame by frame each play and determine wether the call was true or false.

I believe that the proposal made should be allowed and be part of the game. The MLB instant replay should allow the manager to challenge a call made by the umpire. This allows the sport to take away the "botched calls" and bring baseball closer to goal of perfect calls. These important calls define the outcome of the game. One call can be a difference of a major win or a major loss. Also the proposition of the instant replay gives the members of the team specifically the managers of the teams more power and control thus allowing the game to take account the umpires call and the two teams call. One point stated in the article is that this new perception is the "difference between what is true and what we wished were true". People would be able come down with a final conclusion instead of endless time of debate and conflict between one call made by the umpire.

Daniel Ramirez

Harry Bruinis describes how baseball will be heavily impacted by the decision to use instant replay. Will it make it the game better with its crystal clear calls or will that undisputable call take some of the passion that baseball is known for, out of the game? Bruinis argument is not clearly stated, he simply presents arguments for both sides. He states how baseball has always been known for the heated arguments that come from umpires making the wrong calls. These "botched" calls and mistakes have been engraved in baseball history with some very exciting arguments between coaches, umpires, and even amongst the fans. Bruinis explains how human emotion, good and bad, is tied in to botched calls. He uses the example of former Detroit Tigers pitcher, Armando Galarraga. In 2010, Galarraga took a perfect game into the ninth inning, where he had two outs, and umpire Jim Joyce made a decision that forever affected baseball. On what would have been the final out of a perfect game, Joyce called a runner safe who was clearly out. This ruined Galarraga's perfect game and shot at history. Joyce admitted his mistake after the game with tears in his eyes, and the next day Galarraga and Joyce shared a moment. Bruinis explains how that moment of forgiveness was more powerful than the perfect game itself. Instant replay has now been a factor for the past two years in the MLB, and with that, baseball is lacking the excitement of human err from the umpires. All of the disputes between the umpires and the coaches when the wrong call was made is what gave the game and its fans so much excitement. That was classic baseball. With instant replay, the human element has been taken away from baseball and a moment like that of Galarraga and Joyce, will never happen again. Instant replay has taken the raw emotions that baseball was known for away, not only from the coaches and umpires, but also from the fans.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

By signing up you agree to W. W. Norton’s
privacy policy and terms of use.

About They Say / I Blog

  • New readings posted monthly, on the same issues that are covered in “They Say / I Say” with Readings—and with a space where readers can comment, and join the conversation.

Follow us on Twitter to get updates about new posts and more! @NortonWrite

Become a Fan