Harry Hooper said:
BTW, what was MLB's logic in deciding that plays like the missed foul ball call in Wong's last AB should not be reviewable?
Didn't want to respond during the game, but I think they just didn't think about that particular situation. The rule is that fair/foul is only reviewable if it happens behind the standard first and third base umpire's position. I think the reason for the rule is the peculiarity of the fair/foul rule and the limits of camera positioning. The rule, of course, is that a ball that bounces in front of first or third base is fair or foul based on where it touches a player or crosses the bag. If, however, the ball first touches the ground past the bag, it is fair or foul based on whether it is fair or foul when it first touches a player or the field. In the first case, it's going to be very difficult to make a call using video. The question whether the ball is over the base or not when it passes the base is really a 3D question. Without some fancy technology like soccer goal line technology, or cameras in the sky directly above the bag (which do not exist in many ballparks), the view of the play is going to be very dependent on camera angles. So, I think the judgment is that video is rarely if ever going to be reliable, or at least more reliable than a properly positioned umpire. On a ball that first touches down after the bag, however, it's a much more objective question -- which side of the line did it land on. That's one where video evidence in a non-negligible number of cases is likely to be more reliable than what the umpire saw. So, it's appropriate for that fair/foul call.
So, that's the rationale for the rule. My hunch is that these are really the only two scenarios they were thinking about when they drafted the rule. They really weren't thinking about the question whether or not a batter is hit in the batter's box, which video can detect reliably. The way the rule is written, though, what can you do? Wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of modification.