August 6, 201016 yr Say for example, there was instant replay and they went to the booth to review whether Sanchez's hit was fair or foul. They come back in and determine it was fair, then what happens?? Right when Bob Davidson called it foul, the play is basically dead. Gaby stopped running, Hanley didn't round 3rd. So what would the umpires rule? Would they use their judgment and say, well it was a ball hit down the line, so Hanley would have probably scored?? This is where I'm confused. Is this the whole reason why we don't have instant replay, b/c of situations like this?
August 6, 201016 yr Probably the same as a ball that goes out of play, it's ground rule and the umps decide where he would have gone. That would have probably been a ground rule double so we would have won.
August 6, 201016 yr Probably better. With a ground rule double Gaby gets his double instead of that single :mis2
August 6, 201016 yr Well its pretty obvious that if they ruled that a fair ball then Hanley Ramirez would have scored and the game would be over. What they should do with instant replay is see where the baserunner was and with their best judgement see where they would have ultimately ended. In this situation Gaby didn't matter as a baserunner all that mattered was that the ball was fair and Hanley could have jogged home to score the winning run with his fist in the air.
August 6, 201016 yr I think this would be a case of not having definitive evidence. For cases like this they would need to put cameras over the bag, but I am not sure how you do that in non-dome stadiums.
August 6, 201016 yr If we could clearly see it from Fox Sports Florida Cameras how is it not definitive evidence? It shouldve been ruled as an RBI Single, Marlins win 5 - 4.
August 6, 201016 yr If we could clearly see it from Fox Sports Florida Cameras how is it not definitive evidence? It shouldve been ruled as an RBI Single, Marlins win 5 - 4. It wasn't "clearly" seen on the replays, considering there is no camera angle showing the ball actually going over the base in fair territory. However, it is nearly impossible for the ball to bounce in fair territory like that and to have not been fair when it went over the bag. As I've stated before, the bounce before it reached the bag and the bounce after it went over the bag were both in fair territory, it's an EXTREMELY slim possibility that the ball could've been foul in between. I personally don't see how that could happen.
August 6, 201016 yr The main thing I saw was the ball bouncing fair by about 8 inches after it went over the base and my beef there was that the umpire didn't follow the ball past he just saw it over the base and ruled it foul without seeing where the ball ended up bouncing. I don't know what I saw on the replay was a clear fair ball and if we could see that in a replay review then they should be able to aswell.
August 6, 201016 yr Why didn't Edwin point out the mark on the dirt where the ball landed? If the surface is anything like the blaze on some tennis courts, the mark stays for a bit and is pretty obvious. Although I accept the umpire wouldn't of changed his decision regardless
August 6, 201016 yr If the four umpires in a both saw the replay and had the option of overturning it, I'm guessing they would have ruled it fair even without precisely having video that shows where it passed over the bag. Seeing the ball land a few inches fair (what the video does show and something that Davidson missed) would probably second guess the first ruling and would probably induce the umpires to overrturn it. I'm skeptical that Davidson himself would have made the same ruling had he been standing further behind the bag where the ball landed fair or had simply turned his head.
August 6, 201016 yr If the four umpires in a both saw the replay and had the option of overturning it, I'm guessing they would have ruled it fair even without precisely having video that shows where it passed over the bag. Seeing the ball land a few inches fair (what the video does show and something that Davidson missed) would probably second guess the first ruling and would probably induce the umpires to overrturn it. I'm skeptical that Davidson himself would have made the same ruling had he been standing further behind the bag where the ball landed fair or had simply turned his head. I believe I read on mlb.com that after Davidson reviewed the tape, he stated "in his opinion" the ball was still foul. I believe he stated he was not wrong. :whistle
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.