The End of Umpire?

By George F. Will
Sunday, June 15, 2008

"Baseball is the only thing besides the paper clip that hasn't changed."

-- Bill Veeck

One must say it ain't so. Think of the designated hitter, which illustrates why opposition is a sensible reflex when tinkerers propose changing baseball.

A familiar proposal is now being revived, one that involves lessons pertinent to politics, lessons about how careless advocacy can fuel the imperialism of progress. The proposal is for instant replay to assist umpires, who have recently made some bad calls on baseballs hit out of the field of play.

One was first correctly called a home run, but then was ruled a foul ball. Another was hit over the fence but bounced back onto the field and was ruled in play, so what should have been a home run became a double, and so on.

It is not news that to err is human, and so are umpires. Now, however, those ancient truths coexist with a new fact: Seemingly everything is visually recorded. After all, everyone has a camera in the phone in his or her pocket. So we can do something-- can't we? -- about imperfection. That which can be measured can be perfected, can't it? And extremism in pursuit of perfection is no vice, is it?

Because umpires' errors are displayed in television replays, perfectionists want replays available for umpires during games, at least for "boundary" calls: Was the ball that left the field fair or foul? Did a fan interfere with the outfielder?

Some problematic calls by umpires are an unintended consequence of the designs of new, fan-friendly ballparks. Some outfield fences have idiosyncratic contours, and some fences are low enough to allow outfielders to reach into the stands after balls -- and to allow fans to compete with players for possession of them.

People who oppose video replays are disparaged as baseball "purists" by disparagers who presumably are pleased to be known as "impurists." "Luddites," "antediluvians" and "mossbacks" are among the terms applied to people who say the four words that always infuriate impatient reformers: Let's think this through.

The problem is that reformers will not restrain their metabolic urge for perfection. Listen, as they seem not to, to the logic of their language. They say: If you can replay something, you can get it right -- judge it infallibly -- and that is all that matters. This is an argument for using replays on every close call -- plays at the bases and home plate, hit batters. And: Did an outfielder catch or trap a sinking line drive, etc.?

CONTINUED     1        >

© 2008 The Washington Post Company