one_eyed_jack

After a close game decided by a questionable call, the conversation often turns to the topic of Instant Replay. This time, I’ll start it. I’m not interested in rehashing the pros and cons of instant replay, which have been debated for years. The expansion of replay seems inevitable at this point. But as with most issues, the devil is in the details, and there does not seem to be a consensus on how expanded replay will work. Who can initiate replay review? If managers can, do they get a certain number of challenges like in football? What calls can be reviewed? What happens when certain calls are overturned (e.g. a ball hit down the line with runners on base called foul that was actually fair)? It's an interesting topic which I confess I haven't given a ton of thought to, but here's an initial stab. I'd be interested in hearing others' ideas on the subject. Calls subject to review (at least the biggies, I know I’m missing some obscure ones here) Should be subject to replay review: fair/foul, safe/out on any base, retouch, catch/trap, fan interference, whether run scored before third out Should not subject to replay review: ball/strike, balk, catcher’s interference Not sure how I feel about replay review: foul tip on strike 3, hit-by-pitch Who can initiate review Each manager gets 2 challenges, plus 1 additional if game goes into extra innings For non-scoring plays, there is a time limit of 3 minutes for video review. If they cannot find conclusive evidence to overturn it in that time, the call on the field stands Umpires can order review on scoring plays Overturning a call Put things where they would have been had the call been correct in the first instance. This will sometimes require umpire judgment (e.g. on overturned foul ball or catch calls). This is a tough one, but there could be general guidelines (e.g. ball in the corner – all runners get 2 bases, shallow outfield trap = 1 base). There will always be situations where this won’t be completely fair (e.g. Revere may be only allowed to go from first to third on a ball he would have scored easily on), but it’s better than getting the call completely wrong.

After a close game decided by a questionable call, the conversation often turns to the topic of Instant Replay. This time, I’ll start it. I’m not interested in rehashing the pros and cons of instant replay, which have been debated for years. The expansion of replay seems inevitable at this point. But as with most issues, the devil is in the details, and there does not seem to be a consensus on how expanded replay will work. Who can initiate replay review? If managers can, do they get a certain number of challenges like in football? What calls can be reviewed? What happens when certain calls are overturned (e.g. a ball hit down the line with runners on base called foul that was actually fair)? It's an interesting topic which I confess I haven't given a ton of thought to, but here's an initial stab. I'd be interested in hearing others' ideas on the subject. Calls subject to review (at least the biggies, I know I’m missing some obscure ones here) Should be subject to replay review: fair/foul, safe/out on any base, retouch, catch/trap, fan interference, whether run scored before third out Should not subject to replay review: ball/strike, balk, catcher’s interference Not sure how I feel about replay review: foul tip on strike 3, hit-by-pitch Who can initiate review Each manager gets 2 challenges, plus 1 additional if game goes into extra innings For non-scoring plays, there is a time limit of 3 minutes for video review. If they cannot find conclusive evidence to overturn it in that time, the call on the field stands Umpires can order review on scoring plays Overturning a call Put things where they would have been had the call been correct in the first instance. This will sometimes require umpire judgment (e.g. on overturned foul ball or catch calls). This is a tough one, but there could be general guidelines (e.g. ball in the corner – all runners get 2 bases, shallow outfield trap = 1 base). There will always be situations where this won’t be completely fair (e.g. Revere may be only allowed to go from first to third on a ball he would have scored easily on), but it’s better than getting the call completely wrong.

---I don't think the implication there was that the Twins have consistently been one of the best offensive teams in the league. I read that statement as saying there have been several games in which the Twins scored enough run to win but didn't, which is correct. They've now lost 7 of 8 but there were 3 losses where they scored 6 runs and 1 where they scored 5. 5 or 6 runs should be enough to win.

Between this game and the first and last games of the Boston series, that's 3 losses as frustrating as any I can remember. This one was unreal. I swear this umpiring crew had an almost sexual need for Kansas City to win this game. I don't understand why Gray was out there. Yesterday was an off day.

The missed chances are frustrating, but the offense as put 6 runs on the board. That should be enough for a W.

We've gotten a couple of clutch hits in this game. Of course, one of them was called a double play instead.

We got hosed big time in this game. The blown call on Revere would have just given him another shot. But the difference between 1 run/2 still on/only 1 out and inning over if HUGE.

Right now, I don't think I'd do anything. As disappointing and frustrating as it is to only have 5 wins, April is too early to start blowing this thing up, and panic moves do not tend to translate into long-term improvement. Let's see where things are in mid-June. We aren't at a point in the season where teams are a lot of other teams are looking to deal. I think there will be more potential trade partners in June and July.

Souhan's columns may leave me rolling my eyes more often than nodding my head, but he nailed it with this one in the middle of 2010 when he said the time was right to trade Delmon for pitching: http://www.startribune.com/templates/Print_This_Story?sid=98175714 I don't know if Oswalt was the right target, or if he would have come here, but we certainly would have gotten a lot more than a scrub relief pitcher for Delmon had we trade him mid-2010.

As noted previously, the anti-semitic marks, if he said them, are indefensible. Certainly it's not the worst thing a pro athelete has ever done, but I think it's more than a non-story. If I were part of Tiger management or ownership, I would certainly consider it more than a non-story. If it were my wife (who is Jewish) that he shouted anti-Semitic stuff at and shoved to the ground, I would certainly consider it non-trivial. If nothing else, it may shed a little more light on why the Twins were willing to trade him to a division rival for a song.

Agree, RB, Carneal was king. I understand some of the criticisms of Gladden, but I still enjoy listening to him. He may be a homer, but he's no cheerleader. I like that he tells you what he thinks without sounding like he's afraid of offending anyone. He doesn't sugarcoat it. When Dick and Bert watch Valencia boot a grounder, they'll say things like "Danny did a nice job getting in front of that ball but he just couldn't quite come up with it. I'll bet he would like to have that one back", Gladden will say "that's routine right there, Valencia needs to make that play".

Ha! Gardy would actually we pretty good in the booth, but somehow I can't see him doing it. Maybe on an occasional basis like TK. Cuddyer is a guy I could see getting into that one day when he's done playing. Hopefully Mauer never goes there. Love him as a player but could you imagine listening to him for 9 innings? I can't - how could you stay awake that long?

Great post. I'm right with you an all of them. 1) I get a good chuckle over the amount of whining about this. It's exactly the type of thing Twins fans spent years complaining about the team NOT making. With Santana, Hunter, etc., there was constant griping about ownership being too cheap to pay to keep top end talent. Then they open the vaults for Mauer, and it's a constant bitchfest about how he makes too much. Welcome to the realities of big league baseball. You either cough up big bucks for your good players, or someone else will when they hit free agency. 2) Complaning about this was relevant and appropriate several years ago when the issue was still under debate. But it was settled and the stadium was built. You didn't get your way. It happens. Grow up and get over it. 3) Anyone who says this is an uninformed wannabe tough guy.

The call did not cost the Twins the game. Missed calls go against every team. But that one stands out because 1) The Twins were trying to rally in the bottom of the 9th 2) They desperately need a win 3) The same ump blew a call on the same guy earlier in the game 4) It was so blatantly wrong. Like Phil Cuzzi on Joe Mauer's double wrong.

Unreal. To reduce a 6-run deficit to a 1-run deficit, then twice load the bases and not be able to score. Unreal. And that call on Revere's foul ball was just brutal. Did Barksdale go to the Phil Cuzzi School of Umpiring?

Me of little faith with my rant. We've got ourselves a ballgame here, boys and girls!

This is so frustrating on so many levels, but the 2 things that really get me are: 1) It may sound cliche, especially with the frequency Blyleven says it, but it starts and ends with starting pitching. Not only is our rotation awful, but there's not much reason to hope that they'll be able to turn it around. 2) This is a weak and therefore winnable division. Detroit and Cleveland are losing big. Once those games go final, nobody in the division will be more than 2 games over .500. (No, not even the mighty Tigers.) You don't need to be much more than an average team to at least hang around within striking distance, and the Twins can't even do that. This is the where we to thrive. While the rest of the AL Central floundered, the Twins would step forward and take the division. But there's no sign of the potential for that this year.

Terry Ryan was re-hired in November. Don't you think he should be given more than 5 months to try to repair the damage done by Smith? Also, the "fire sale" approach of trading every established player for propsects never work. You don't want to become a team that is perpetually building for tomorrow. Ask a diehard Royals fan how they've like being the team of the future for over a decade now. There's enough here to remain at least competent if not competitive while the cupboard is restocked. There's no need to go to the extreme of fielding a minor league team. Fans will not show up for that. And what established free agent will want to come here to babysit a Romper Room roster of kids who would be better off in the minors?

Great post, FDG. For me, it's much more about the ride, but I see both perspectives. If you're going to consider every season that doesn't end with a parade a complete failure, you're not to going to have a lot of fun. And it's baseball, it's supposed to be fun. It was fun watching the low-budget Twins beat out much more heavily-funded teams for playoff spots, even if those postseason runs fizzled early. When I think back to 2009, I think of the Twins piecing together an improbable late season comeback with a bunch of September callups, that culminated in an unforgettable game 163 more than I do another frustrating defeat at the hands of the Evil Empire. But by 2010, the whole "little team that could" thing had gotten old and a divison title seemed a lot less satisfying. That team was good enough to beat the Yankees, but the Bombers barely had to break a sweat.

Can we just forfeit this game in the interest of preserving the Twins bullpen and my sanity?

I'm sorry, but it's hard not to be condescending when you go with the "fire everyone and replace them with guys from the glory days" cry. It's a ridiculously common fantasy of frustrated Twins fans - the team has a "we're getting the band back together" press conference to announce that heroes of yore are back in the fold. Then Hrbek, Gladden and Co. march into the locker room wearing their World Series rings and fiercely re-tell a bunch of war stories while the current Twins sit half-scared, half-amazed as they absorb the lessons of what it takes to win in the big leagues. Then, inspired, they go out and trounce everyone in sight en route to a World Series crown. I hate to burst your bubble, but it's not going to happen. I'm open to regime change if this disaster continues, but there needs to be something more than "they played good for the Twins 25 years ago" on their resume to convince me that they are the right guys hire.

That was directed at the author of the post, not your comment, but I appreciate your concern.

Is there something is particuar you are responding to here, or do you just enjoy restating the obvious?

Most teams have gone longer than that without winning a championship. 11 teams have won a Championship since the Twins last did. That leaves more than half the league with a longer drought than the Twins. I guess they should all clean house whenever they get off to a slow start? That list of replacements is amusing. Apparently your only criteria there is that the guy was one of your boyhood heroes. I'm surprised Luke Skywalker and Indiana Jones weren't mentioned.

Can't get enough of TK in the booth. The man is just plain awesome.