With the recent gaffes by umpires in the MLB playoffs, I know there is this big cry for increased use of instant replay.

While I am in favor of the use of instant replay on a limited basis, I have a better idea: How about getting more competent umpires. With the exception of balls and strikes, which have always been subjective (even though the rule does define what a strike zone is), most of these missed calls have been blatant.

Whether it is the Yankees' Greg Golson's catch that was called a hit or the Giants' Buster Posey stealing second (when he was clearly out) that led to the only run in San Francisco's 1-0 win over the Braves to a couple of blown calls against the Rays that helped the Rangers to a 2-0 series lead, the umpires have been flat out awful.

I'll even give home plate umpire Hunter Wendelstedt a break on the strike 3 pitch he called a ball on the Yanks' Lance Berkman before he hit a go-ahead RBI double against the Twins because 1) ball/strike calls might be the toughest call any umpire/referee makes and 2) he had been calling that pitch a ball all game.

All I've been hearing is how we need to expand replay, but how about expanding the search to find better umpires?

I consider myself a bit of a tradionalist, so I don't believe we need to turn to replay to solve all the problems of human error. If we start down that slope, maybe in a few years -- with our technology -- we can use technology instead of umpires.

After what we've witnessed the past couple of days, I'm sure a lot of people would love that idea.