These three games exemplify the dire need for instant replay in the today's sports. While the NFL all ready has implemented a thorough instant replay policy, the other sports leagues are still behind.
The main worry for soccer and baseball is that they would slow down the game. Interesting argument. Baseball is widely criticized for taking as long as it does, and in the process boring the minds of fans everywhere. But for Galarraga, the Detroit Tigers starting pitcher who was an out away from claiming the 21st perfect game in MLB history, I'm sure if he had to wait an extra five minutes he would have been okay.
Or what about the Boston Celtics? During the 2010 NBA Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and the C's, many controversial calls caught the eyes of fans, players and coaches. I can recall Game Three when Kobe Bryant was called for an offensive foul after Ray Allen performed an Oscar-winning flop. Or what about the decisive Game Seven? The fourth quarter featured so many fouls that it challenged King Kong's movie ending; the entire audience just wondering, "When will it be over?"
And in the World Cup, where scoring and simply winning games is at a premium, the chance for the United States to have a goal be discounted out of a bogus call is simply too much. Clint Dempsey's disallowed goal should only highlight the need for instant replay in soccer (as well as other sports) as it was on a worldwide stage where everyone could clearly see the mishap.
So while us fans think instant replay, it's the commissioners of all these leagues who still oppose it.
Bud Selig said it was against the unspoken baseball code to overturn a miscalled call in Galarraga's imperfect game even after the umpire Jim Joyce admitted his mistake. Yeah? Well, Bud has done it again. Galarraga said he was fine with it, but he cannot be happy that his spot in history was disrupted by a blown call.
Should there have been an MLB instant replay policy regarding anything other than just home runs, this may not be the case. But Selig does not want to interfere with the game. Classic Selig.
Granted if there was a discussion for replay for balls and strikes, he may have a point. No one wants every other pitch challenged and then reviewed. But in terms of fair-fail or safe-out, in addition to home runs, there is really no downside.
So what could soccer really be risking if it decided to implement a replay review process element to the game? For one, accuracy. And two, legitimacy A World Cup game is on broadcast for two hours and 30 minutes, the same as the an regular season NBA game. In fact, the match up this morning between the U.S. and Algeria did not even start until 10 a.m., so the game was about two hours. This is still less than the average NFL game, MLB game, NHL game and NBA game (especially a three-hour playoff game, got to love the half-hour halftime shows).
It all comes down to those extra few minutes it takes to run over to the camera and quickly check a call on the field. If you're telling me that a maximum of five minutes added to the game is too much time to risk in order to make sure the game is fair and precisely called, then you win.
Besides, I can DVR it.
