Is MLB censoring the broadcasts?
Noticed something odd last night while watching Game 3 of the World Series.
Houston's Jason Lane hits what is declared a "home run" leading off the bottom of the 4th. But a slow-mo replay shows that the ball was not a home run by several feet, though it is difficult for umpires to judge given the way the stadium is striped and painted. (Another factoid for our File of Loathing for Lemonade Park!) Given the way the ball caroomed and was fielded, Lane would've been pressed for a double.
The broadcasters started to make a big deal out of the mistake but after the inning ended, the commercial break taken, there was no more mention of the fact. Not once. Not even when the game was tied and began going into extra innings to become the longest World Series game in history. Not one mention that the umps had given Houston a golden chance to win their first home World Series game.
True, baseball fans have a high degree of tolerance for umpiring mistakes: we think it's a colorful part of the game that instant replay would ruin, even though it angers us temporarily when bad calls happen. It gives us the "what if" stuff to talk about, so you'd think that the Lane "homer" would be noteworthy. It was never mentioned again.
Further, we have scanned several stories on last night's game and not one mentions the questionable home run call.
Was the broadcasting team told to drop the subject? It's no secret that Bud Selig is no fan of instant replay. As he told Sports Illustrated:
"I'm a football fan. Those football games last interminably," he said. "It would not be something that I think would work. The human element in this sport has always been a part of it."MLB is also throwing its weight around on other matters, like ordering Houston to open its dome roof on a beautiful fall night in October. Houston objected -- it's a guaranteed noise maker -- but complied. Houston is 36-17 this year with the roof closed but only 15-11 with it opened.
Ah, the sweet roar of success! The quiet tear drops of failure.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home