I'm sorry for yellin'. Like Sheeters' Pooter, I, too, am trying to take some of the weight off. To that end, I'm trying to limit my coffee intake -- not because coffee's all that bad for you, but because I take mine with about a cup of Coffeemate Cherry Streussel creamer. Anyway, in lieu of my customary four cups of coffee, I'm trying this chai tea shit. Pros: tastes pretty good, can be served hot or cold, doesn't have to be served with a half-gallon of creamer. Cons: doesn't wake me the fuck up. Holy fucking God, I'm tired. And when I'm tired, I get pissy. And when I get pissy, I start yellin'. So, to go full circle: sorry for yellin'.
But, FUCK, man -- this is the second post that has befouled this blog with complaints against using replay in baseball. I can't abide this any longer. Let's review the case against instant replay by using the arguments The Animal made before:
They use it in football, and it ain't all that great.
The fuck it isn't. The only problem with replay in football is that they don't use it more often. I mean, how stupid was it that, before this year, you couldn't review whether a field goal cleared the cross bar? That's the reason the Competition Committee considers replay every year -- not because they're not sure if it's working, but because they want to make it even better.
And the reason instant replay works in football is not because there are less overturnable calls than in baseball. The reason instant replay works is because -- gasp! -- IT SHOWS YOU EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED SO YOU CAN CORRECT OBVIOUS ERRORS. And because football put hard-and-fast rules in place to control when it's used, because they didn't want coaches challenging plays saying: "Hey, 78 was holding right there. Go back and look at the tape." For some reason, people seem to think baseball wouldn't put similar guidelines in place. Maybe it's because this guy is at the helm:
It will take too long to use, and baseball is already too long, and if it gets any longer, then the terrorists have won.
You mean it takes longer than the manager running out to the ump who made the call, screaming at him, kicking dirt at him, pissing on his leg, then running over to the crew chief, screaming at him, kicking dirt at him, pissing on his leg, and then having the umpires get together so they can talk about what a dickhead the manager is and pretend to talk about the call for a couple minutes? That's faster?
People who complain about the length of baseball games are one of two things: (1) twelve years old, have ADD, can't sit through anything; or (2) 86 years old, are cranky, long for the days when Warren Spahn pitched 12 consecutive shut outs on 12 consecutive days, can't sit through anything. To both groups, a round of "Shut the fuck up," on the house.
Sure, they're talking about just using it for home runs, but, if you give a mouse a cookie, he's going to want to review plays at the plate, and then plays at first, and then balls and strikes...
We see this all the time in the legal world. It's called the "The Republic will collapse" argument; you take something that sounds like a great idea -- like, say, using instant replay to review close home runs -- and then take the focus off that great idea by running down the slippery slope of all the places the idea could (but won't) take you -- like, say, using instant replay to review balls and strikes. The typical response to the "The Republic will collapse" argument: roll your eyes, mutter "Jesus Christ" for effect, throw your hands in the air at your discretion.
Long story short: don't come in here with the slippery slope argument.
The next argument is so outlandish that I'll just quote Reid:
"[G]o to that espn.com article and look at the poll results. 89.4% of the responders favor some form of instant replay in baseball. Of those 89.4%, 22% favor replay on ALL CLOSE CALLS!!! That is complete fucking insanity."
First question: 10.6% of Americans don't think there should be instant replay in baseball? Jesus -- now I see how Bush got elected twice.
Second question: how does the fact that 22% of 90% (math, ow) favor replay on every close call show that we're heading down the slippery slope of reviewing balls and strikes? You can't do shit with twenty-two percent of anything. I bet if you polled NFL fans, more than 25% would say they want instant replay for pass interference calls. Does that mean it's going to happen? Of course not.
"The umpires make the right call so often that all replay will do is prove how fucking good they really are, and give the haters more ammo."
I am a hater. I hate umpires. I think their job is very, very easy; it's basically taking an eye test for three hours. And with all that repetition, they damn well better make the right call 9.8 times out of ten. And now, six-pound eight-ounce Baby Jesus has given us the technology to fix those 0.2 times they get it wrong. And we're going to say: "No, thanks, we like it the way it is"? Seriously?
Human error is part of the game, for sure: human error by the PLAYERS. That is part of baseball's charm. Conversely, it is not fucking quaint or pastoral when an umpire blows the most significant call in the game -- whether a ball was out of the park or not. That is fucking West Virginia backwoods horseshit. That is backwards. That needs to stop. Yesterday.
Jesus Christ, I'm a grouch. I'm off to Starbucks.