Perfect game? Nope...

[Beninator]

IMO, it's embarrassing watching the umpire apologize and crying. He called it the way he saw it at that split second like he has done thousands of calls. I know he feels bad but this isn't the first one he has called wrong, it's just that the situation was so much different.
Just thinking, if they would overturn this one, do you think Bradley could get the NCAA to review the film of the game in the Garden when Squeaky was obviously fouled, and give Bradley the National championship.

Sorry Chico, we can agree to disagree, but I find it refreshing that Joyce has openly admitted that he was wrong. IMO we need more of that...

IMHO, they should not review foul calls or non calls in Squeaky's case, but College Basketball does review last second shots and the occasional three point shot. Just about every sport uses a form of replay. I have yet to see a reason why baseball should not use replay. I personally don't like the "imperfect game" reason. The players, umpires, and fans deserve better. Baseball is a game that does change albeit slowly. --lowering the pithing mound in 1968...the dead ball era... just two examples....

One other point that I think that is lost in this thread and something that I think is a reason to support replay is that the umpiring in MLB has gotten steadily worse throughout the years.

Just my two cents on a rainy day...

[DUBrave5]

IMO, it's embarrassing watching the umpire apologize and crying. He called it the way he saw it at that split second like he has done thousands of calls. I know he feels bad but this isn't the first one he has called wrong, it's just that the situation was so much different.
Just thinking, if they would overturn this one, do you think Bradley could get the NCAA to review the film of the game in the Garden when Squeaky was obviously fouled, and give Bradley the National championship.

There is a big difference between the perfect game and the situation you just brought up. If MLB reversed the call it would have no effect on the outcome of the game since the Tigers still won, just one batter later. You are, I think sarcastically, suggesting that if they reviewed the game with Squeaky, then that would change the outcome and give Bradley the National Championship. Since it doesn't change the outcome of the game, I really think that MLB should bite the bullet on this one and rule that the call was wrong and award the perfect game.

And on the subject of Jim Joyce, yeah I was not a fan of his crying and being so emotional when he has screwed up calls in his life because it is inevitable being an umpire, but to come out and admit he was wrong and apologize in person to Galaragga and then go back out there the next day and ump the plate after being told by MLB that he could have the day off shows a ton about his character and what kind of man he is and I really think that level of accountability is rarely seen these days. He, and Galaragga for that matter, has handled this whole situation extremely well IMHO.

[Chico]

There is a big difference between the perfect game and the situation you just brought up. If MLB reversed the call it would have no effect on the outcome of the game since the Tigers still won, just one batter later. You are, I think sarcastically, suggesting that if they reviewed the game with Squeaky, then that would change the outcome and give Bradley the National Championship. Since it doesn't change the outcome of the game, I really think that MLB should bite the bullet on this one and rule that the call was wrong and award the perfect game.

And on the subject of Jim Joyce, yeah I was not a fan of his crying and being so emotional when he has screwed up calls in his life because it is inevitable being an umpire, but to come out and admit he was wrong and apologize in person to Galaragga and then go back out there the next day and ump the plate after being told by MLB that he could have the day off shows a ton about his character and what kind of man he is and I really think that level of accountability is rarely seen these days. He, and Galaragga for that matter, has handled this whole situation extremely well IMHO.

Gosh, I thought it was obvious I was being sarcastic about the Squeaky non- call, which by the way was much more obvious than the call at first base. Sorry, but I think there are enough wrong calls made throughout the season that enventually cost team's wins. When that happens should an umpire apologize to the team that just lost a game. If so, I'm going into the hanky business.

[shaunguth]

There is a big difference between the perfect game and the situation you just brought up. If MLB reversed the call it would have no effect on the outcome of the game since the Tigers still won, just one batter later. You are, I think sarcastically, suggesting that if they reviewed the game with Squeaky, then that would change the outcome and give Bradley the National Championship. Since it doesn't change the outcome of the game, I really think that MLB should bite the bullet on this one and rule that the call was wrong and award the perfect game.

So now we want to use replay when it can affect the outcome of a game and when it does not affect the outcome of a game? And what of the situation if it had been reversed and/or happened earlier in the game? Does everyone want MLB to step in and take away a "perfect game" at a later date? Reversing calls at a later time just sets a bad precedent in my opinion.

[Beninator]

So now we want to use replay when it can affect the outcome of a game and when it does not affect the outcome of a game? And what of the situation if it had been reversed and/or happened earlier in the game? [B] Does everyone want MLB to step in and take away a "perfect game" at a later date? Reversing calls at a later time just sets a bad[/B] precedent in my opinion.

But the precedent is there for MLB to reverse decisions that were already in the record books! Take Fay Vincent in 1991 for example. If MLB can take away 50 no-hitters from the record books they can certainly go back and reinstate a perfect game at a later date.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/37479309/ns/sports-baseball/

"In 1991, a panel headed by then-commissioner Fay Vincent took a look at the record book and decided to throw out 50 no-hitters for various reasons. None of them, however, involved changing calls made on the field."

[shaunguth]

I guess my main thing is that I hate to see replay change something after the fact. It's either available for review at the time it happens or it isn't. Don't get me wrong....I love the sport, but baseball is a flawed sport to begin with. The playing field is not a regulated size, the umpires will let a guy score on a fly ball unless it's pointed out by the other team that the runner "cheated" by leaving the base too early (this has never made sense to me), and don't get me going on the people that hate the Yankees because they can afford to "buy" the players they want when it's the rules/governing body of baseball that the hate should really be directed towards.

[Chico]

But the precedent is there for MLB to reverse decisions that were already in the record books! Take Fay Vincent in 1991 for example. If MLB can take away 50 no-hitters from the record books they can certainly go back and reinstate a perfect game at a later date.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/37479309/ns/sports-baseball/

"In 1991, a panel headed by then-commissioner Fay Vincent took a look at the record book and decided to throw out 50 no-hitters for various reasons. None of them, however, involved changing calls made on the field."

If none of the 50 involved changing calls made on the field, then it would be setting a precedent if the play at first was reversed.