Umpires concerned about the sluggish pace of games?!!

PPRRFFTT!

And what happens if the wireless access to their handheld device is unreliable. Some stadiums are better equipped for that kind of stuff than others. My friend's iPhone is slow as hell at Yankee Stadium.

I like the idea of a fifth umpire in the booth with access to screens with better resolution.

Give the Third Base ump a hand-held. He's not too busy.
Or put something in a camera well for all the umps.
I like the idea of a guy on the field also looking at the replay. Perhaps the ump who made the original call gets to watch it. He's in the moment. It can help him confirm or reaffirm what he saw. Or the crew chief has the call.
As a part-time ump, I like the idea of someone in the flow of the game making the decision.

The best way to get better at calling home runs is seeing where mistakes are made.

Give me a good reason someone not involved with play on the field should make the call. Delaying the game isn't compelling enough.

How about a five man umpiring crew with the fifth ump rotating in the booth for any instant replay calls as well as serving as the official scorer? I've never cared for the fact the official scorer wasn't an actual MLB official and was usually a local sportswriter. It would give the instant replay ump actual duties besides just checking replays, especially since you'd probably only need to use the fifth ump on rare occasions anyway.

I like the idea of the 5 man rotation with the scorekeeper. Error/ hit rulings have been pretty ridiculous for as long as I can remember.

Wouldn't the picture on a handheld be too small to discern anything from? Sometimes it can be difficult to tell if it is a homerun or not even on a regular sized television.

In principle, the idea of a handheld sounds good, but the screen is way too small to distinguish what happens. The idea is to ensure more accuracy and not raise more doubts because someone's using a three-inch iPhone screen.

I also like the idea of a 5-man crew with the 5th umpire serving as official scorer and serving as the replay official in the booth. Perhaps that will end the dugout lobbying to change errors to base hits and vice versa. And perhaps we'll achieve some consistency in official scoring.
Bill

I like the idea of the 5th ump in the box. The umpires on the field have no special knowledge the ump in the box doesn't have. And especially on a home run call.

I'm not sure he'd want to be the official scorer, however. Seems to me they don't want or need the additional ill feelings that might engender.

I agree with the 5th ump/official scorer concept. I don't think it matters whether an on-field ump makes the call or not. The NHL's replay system involves a call to a central video-review office in Toronto, for goodness sakes, and it doesn't hinder the flow of the game. And hockey is a much more flow-dependent sort of game than baseball. I love baseball, but it ain't got no flow. It's more of a meander.

"It's more of a meander..."

Couldn't agree more!

People seem to be complaining a lot (not on this thread, but in general) about a video referee ruining the 'flow' of the game... now, is it just me, or do 4 umpire conferences in the middle of the pitch not take away a tiny bit of flow as well?

Or how about the other night, where Variteck asked for a checked swing to be called a strike, the ump said no, then Lugo asked, got told no; he then got ejected, after which Francona comes out to have a 'chat' with the umpire, after which he gets ejected. Maybe, again, it's just me, but surely that isn't exactly keeping flow in the game...? It's simply a case of one being 'exceptable' in terms of tradition of the game, and another being a 'new, bold' idea.

Best idea is to use a Fifth umpire solely as a video replay umpire - I'm a field hockey umpire over here in the UK, and in International Hockey replay is used for goals etc. that the umpires are not sure about - the call is transfered up to another umpire, who uses the replay to make the correct decision. Small, hand-held screens are a BAD idea - bulky, not easy to use, difficult to see under floodlight, in rain, etc. and with a terrible screen size.

My last point... however people feel about a video replay being used, isn't it more important for THE GAME that the right decision is reached? Who cares if it takes an extra 2 minutes for the game to meander through the afternoon...

A fifth umpire in the press box is a good idea, with the power to overturn fair/foul and home runs especially, in light of the most recent debacles.

I've held for a long time that you could recruit any four people from the grandstands who would be just as good as the "professionals". They could not POSSIBLY be any worse.

Sorry if that hurts some feelings out there, but watching tonight's game at Baltimore makes my point. Andy Fletcher, behind home plate, theatrically "rung up" Coco Crisp on a pitch that was clearly outside and low in the ninth. Only problem: there was only one strike. Coco complained as he got back into the box and Fletcher got into it with him, ripping off his mask and prompting Tito Francona to come out and rescue his hitter. The ump forgets the count and HE takes exception to to getting called on it? What the hell? Keeping track of balls and strikes ain't rocket science. All a bleepin' umpire has to do is pay attention and get it right. No, they're more concerned with their egos and protecting each other. Getting it right is the last thing on their minds.

Umpires, especially the McClellands of the world, are under the incredibly mistaken impression that I'VE PAID TO SEE THEM.

I've got no use for most of 'em.

I like the way hockey does it. They have the main office in New York do the replays via TV. It is quick and effective. No reason why the replay official has to be in the stadium...none at all.

Just play the replay on the Jumbotron so that everyone in the park can see it and nobody can complain.

Why not? Everyone wants to know, so show the damned thing.