Sports Law Blog
All things legal relating
to the sports world...
Thursday, June 03, 2010
Is it just about perfection?

A question to those clambering for Bud Selig to reverse the call and award Galarraga a perfect game: Is it just about the perfect game, that unique historical rarity? What if it had been an ordinary no-hitter? A one-hitter? What about a shut-out (where the outcome was otherwise unaffected)?

I am trying to figure out why this would not have the commissioner reviewing all sorts of calls post hoc (although Mitch Berman's suggestion could limit this problem). I just am not exorcised about the "correctness" issue, at least where sports are concerned. I prefer finality and redoing all sorts of things once the game ends.



Blogger Rick Karcher -- 6/03/2010 10:32 PM  

The fact that a perfect game in Major League Baseball was lost due to a bad call by the umpire directly challenges Selig's belief that the "human element" in baseball is all that's necessary to ensure a fair outcome. He's wrong and hopefully, this costly mistake by the umpire will hasten the implementation of video replay into Major League Baseball.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/04/2010 12:32 AM  

...furthermore, Selig should overturn the call and award the pitcher his perfect game. The overwhelming consensus is that the call was wrong. The umpire has admitted he made a mistake and apologized for it. Selig can do the right thing!

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/04/2010 12:39 AM  

Selig should overturn the call by issuing a statement that begins “Due to the extremely unusual circumstances involving Wednesday night’s events . . . .” That would make everyone happy (especially own umpire) and ensure that the commissioner’s office did not open the door to future call reversals.

Anonymous Andrew -- 6/04/2010 10:12 AM  

Bud Selig did exactly what he should have done. There is a human element in sports, and sometimes, a ref or an ump will get it completely wrong. I feel for the pitcher, but it was the umps call to make, and he made it.

If Selig is supposed to "correct" the record books by awarding a player a stat that is not supported by the calls made on the field and the offical boxscore, then we can just throw the record books out the window.

If we are going to "fix" the books because of a bad call, lets go back and review the rest of the calls in that game. Maybe there was a strike three that should have been ball four...

Blogger Jimmy H -- 6/06/2010 8:20 PM  

Suppose for a moment that Jim Joyce had called the runner out when replays showed conclusively that the runner was safe. In that case, the pitcher would have a perfect game on the books that ought not be there.

If the Commissioner overturns that erroneous call to be sure that "things are 100% correct in the record books", would they not have to reconvene the teams and continue the game?

Sounds like a messy situation to me...

Anonymous The Sports Curmudgeon -- 6/07/2010 12:50 AM  

In my first post on this (to which I link), I mention a proposal from one correspondent who proposed that the commissioner could change the ruling if no counter-factual would be required (what would have happened next? what might have happened differently?), the game would not need to be replayed or continued, and the outcome would be unchanged. This would take care of the slippery slope problem by limiting the situations in which the commissioner could act--basically to this type of blown *out* call on what would have been the final play of the game. The opposite (called out when actually safe) would not be subject to review.

Blogger Howard Wasserman -- 6/08/2010 7:06 AM  

Right. You just stated why the majority of fans (at least according to the polls) think the commissioner should act. And he can do that under the best interest clause. No need to create any new rules that limit the situations in which he could act.

Blogger Rick Karcher -- 6/08/2010 11:23 AM  

Post a Comment