Expansion: How Bohm’s slide was not overturned boggles the mind, but the missed call that was even worse was Conforto’s fraudulent HBP.
“The guy was hit by the pitch in the strike zone,” umpire Ron Kulpa admirably told a pool reporter after he reviewed the mistake that led to a 3-2 Mets win. “I should have called him out.”
But where was the replay review to have Kulpa’s back before a play that should have been ruled a dead-ball strike turned into a walk-off winner for the Mets? It wasn’t there to save him, thanks to convoluted rules.
The only part of that play that was reviewable was if the ball hit Conforto. If the pitch was in the strike zone was not reviewable. Neither was determining if Conforto leaned into the pitch, which he did, clearly. Whether or not a player intentionally slides into a player to break up a double play is reviewable, but a batter’s intent on leaning into a pitch is not. Does that make sense? It shouldn’t.
The list of what is reviewable needs to be expanded, by a lot. Wanting to keep balls and strikes off that list is understandable, but if an event like a hit-by-pitch brings it into the realm of discussion, determining if that pitch was a ball or strike should be fair game. The Williams play was another that was not reviewable, because the current rules allow only balls that first land at or beyond the set positions of the first or third-base umpire to be examined. Yet another self-imposed limitation. Protecting umpires should not be the goal. Getting calls right should be the goal.