Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1554
Location: clawing my eyes out, praying for sleep. booyah.
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:40 am Post subject:
i wouldn't, for about a week. then i would. i grew up as a pitcher. i LOVE umpires. if you're good, you get extra plate. if you're bad, you don't. i was a good pitcher -- i love that part of the game.
would you still support the variances in parks if the dbacks lost a playoff series because young ran into a fucking flag pole in centerfield? i'd be pissed as hell, for about a week. but then i'd go back to liking that flagpole.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1753
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:00 pm Post subject:
matt wrote:
I could get behind replay but I don't think I could get behind automated strike zones.
Same here.
IIRC, the Questec system was meant for "internal" use by MLB in their evaluation of umpires calling balls and strikes; with the goal to help the umpires themselves "learn" an unambiguous strike zone, according to MLB standards. The many criticisms leveled against the use of "automation" even on that level suggests that opposition to actually calling balls and strikes that way would be horrendous.
But for safe/out calls on the basepaths, fair/foul calls, and "did it clear the fence or not?" calls (and others of that degree), some sort of replay system out to be tested and evaluated by MLB -- imho...
_________________
Is It Next Season Yet?
All times are GMT - 7 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
