Expanded replay is not coming in 2013, but boy howdy, look out for 2014

68 Comments

I guess the post office has finally delivered those letters Bud Selig had been asking for, because Jayson Stark reports that there will likely be expanded replay in 2014.

There had been talk of expanding replay to some degree in 2013 — to fair/foul calls, mostly — but Stark reports that people in the game are taking a go-big-or-go-home approach and would prefer to implement something more comprehensive. That will take waiting a year as opposed to rushing something into place this year.  Which, OK, even though I wish we had replay yesterday, I agree is probably the best move. Let’s do this thing right if we’re going to do it.

The only unsettling part is that, according to Stark, there is still some debate about what sort of system to implement and that — brace yourselves — some version of a challenge system is still on the table. Stark refers to a plan in which managers may get, say, two challenges a game for close calls.

Which I absolutely hate.  Either commit to getting all or as many calls correct as possible or don’t. Don’t make some game out of it where — sorry, Cholly! — you just lost a big game because you foolishly wasted your challenges on clear umpire mistakes in the first couple of innings and now you’re stuck with a clear umpire mistake in the eighth!

As I’ve said umpteen times: Put an ump in a booth with the power to call down to his colleagues and overturn them. If you must, set up a mission control in MLB headquarters that is able to do functionally the same thing.  But dear God, do not turn getting the mistakes of umpires into some sort of carnival side show cum game of chance for managers.  They got enough to worry about already without making the umpires’ problems their own.

The Hall of Fame rejected the BBWAA vote to make ballots public

Getty Images
Leave a comment

Last year, at the Winter Meetings, the BBWAA voted overwhelmingly to make Hall of Fame ballots public beginning with this year’s election. Their as a long-demanded one, and it served to make a process that has often frustrated fans — and many voters — more transparent.

Mark Feinsand of MLB.com tweeted a few minutes ago, however, that at some point since last December, the Hall of Fame rejected the BBWAA’s vote. Writer may continue to release their own ballots, but their votes will not automatically be made public.

I don’t know what the rationale could possibly be for the Hall of Fame. If I had to guess, I’d say that the less-active BBWAA voters who either voted against that change or who weren’t present for it because they don’t go to the Winter Meetings complained about it. It’s likewise possible that the Hall simply doesn’t want anyone talking about the votes and voters so as not to take attention away from the honorees and the institution, but that train left the station years ago. If the Hall doesn’t want people talking about votes and voters, they’d have to change the whole thing to some star chamber kind of process in which the voters themselves aren’t even known and no one discusses it publicly until after the results are released.

Oh well. There’s a lot the Hall of Fame does that doesn’t make a ton of sense. Add this to the list.