FULL INSTANT REPLAY COMING (minus strike zone)

[Schwarber Fan]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2013/08/15/mlb-instant-replay-manager-challenges-on-hold/2659555/

 

Hallelujah!

[Cubswin11]

:clapping: Hopefully the NL adopting the DH won't be too far behind

[Guest]

Just automate balls/strikes already.

[Tracer Bullet]

I'm waiting for the day when the jumbotron will instantly tell you the outcome of a pitch the second the ball is released. Based on the pitch speed, type and arm angle, the batter's history and the alignment of the defense, that's gonna be a double down the RF line. I'm calling it pre-play.

[Cubswin11]

Just automate balls/strikes already.

The thing is the automated strike zone would probably be the easiest of all these things to implement. Keep the homplate umpire behind the plate for plays at the plate, fair/foul calls, check swings, catcher interference, etc. and just have it buzzed into the home plate ump via an earpiece or a visual on the scoreboard or something and then he makes the ball/strike call.

[MWV]

Just automate balls/strikes already.

No kidding. Available technologies allow the average fan to ascertain (in real time!) the routine manner in which umpires miss ball/strike calls. Is baseball not sufficiently embarrassed by this?

[Guest]

Just automate balls/strikes already.

No kidding. Available technologies allow the average fan to ascertain (in real time!) the routine manner in which umpires miss ball/strike calls. Is baseball not sufficiently embarrassed by this?

 

You're assuming those systems are acceptably accurate.

 

I'm not sure the technology is there yet for this...especially not as instantaneously as it would need to be.

[pitchcs]

So 6 total challenges available each game? Jesus, that sounds awful and time consuming.

[Guest]

There should be no challenges and it should just be an extra ump somewhere (either at the park or at a central location for everyone) correcting calls that need to be corrected.

[Cubswin11]

Just automate balls/strikes already.

No kidding. Available technologies allow the average fan to ascertain (in real time!) the routine manner in which umpires miss ball/strike calls. Is baseball not sufficiently embarrassed by this?

 

You're assuming those systems are acceptably accurate.

 

I'm not sure the technology is there yet for this...especially not as instantaneously as it would need to be.

So you don't think FoxTracks or whatever FSN/Fox calls their pitch recognition/location thing isn't instantaneous? Also while they might not be acceptably accurate wouldn't it at least create more of a standard throughout the league that would take away the variance of umps have big/small/high/low/inside/outside strike zones?

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

So 6 total challenges available each game? Jesus, that sounds awful and time consuming.

 

Yeah, just like managers running out of the dugout and bickering with umpires for no god damn reason.

 

Anyway:

 

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/hillary.gif

[Guest]

So you don't think FoxTracks or whatever FSN/Fox calls their pitch recognition/location thing isn't instantaneous?

I'm not sure that it's anywhere near as quick as what it currently takes to have a ball/strike call.

 

 

Also while they might not be acceptably accurate wouldn't it at least create more of a standard throughout the league that would take away the variance of umps have big/small/high/low/inside/outside strike zones?

 

Just because it's a machine doesn't mean it is necessarily consistent. In other words, the same exact pitch might not get read the same way each time. From what I understand, there are issues with this.

[MWV]

Both the QuesTec and the Sportvision camera setups have a stated measurement error (with proper calibration) of 0.5 inches. Calibration is an issue, although I imagine that if these systems were to be used by MLB to actually call balls and strikes, then a more rigorous and universal calibration protocol would be put in place. I recall a baseball prospectus article addressing these calibration uncertainties from a few years back, I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

With respect to whether or not the calls could be delivered instantaneously, computers are very good at performing newtonian dynamics calculations, particularly for an object sample of 1 ball per measurement. Time would not be an issue.

[Guest]

Both the QuesTec and the Sportvision camera setups have a stated measurement error (with proper calibration) of 0.5 inches. Calibration is an issue, although I imagine that if these systems were to be used by MLB to actually call balls and strikes, then a more rigorous and universal calibration protocol would be put in place. I recall a baseball prospectus article addressing these calibration uncertainties from a few years back, I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

With respect to whether or not the calls could be delivered instantaneously, computers are very good at performing newtonian dynamics calculations, particularly for an object sample of 1 ball per measurement. Time would not be an issue.

 

 

Maybe I'm overestimating how long the whole process would take, but anything more than a second would seem like a lot compared to how it is now.

[Banedon]

You're assuming those systems are acceptably accurate.

 

Define "acceptably accurate".

 

Are umpires acceptably accurate? If they're not, why should the robots be held to such a lofty standard?

[pitchcs]

So 6 total challenges available each game? Jesus, that sounds awful and time consuming.

 

Yeah, just like managers running out of the dugout and bickering with umpires for no [expletive] reason.

 

 

Cause that happens so often.

 

You better believe they will start taking advantage of this new rule even if they don't think they will win the challenge. I mean if you have them why not use them?

[Guest]

You're assuming those systems are acceptably accurate.

 

Define "acceptably accurate".

 

Are umpires acceptably accurate? If they're not, why should the robots be held to such a lofty standard?

 

Yes, umpires are acceptably accurate.

 

And I'm not a human element guy (and I can't imagine that anyone would peg me for one), so if the technology is there to improve that and take away inconsistencies and bias, then I'm all for it.

[MWV]

Both the QuesTec and the Sportvision camera setups have a stated measurement error (with proper calibration) of 0.5 inches. Calibration is an issue, although I imagine that if these systems were to be used by MLB to actually call balls and strikes, then a more rigorous and universal calibration protocol would be put in place. I recall a baseball prospectus article addressing these calibration uncertainties from a few years back, I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

With respect to whether or not the calls could be delivered instantaneously, computers are very good at performing newtonian dynamics calculations, particularly for an object sample of 1 ball per measurement. Time would not be an issue.

 

 

Maybe I'm overestimating how long the whole process would take, but anything more than a second would seem like a lot compared to how it is now.

I'm very confident that the calculation and transmission of data would be, for all intents and purposes, instantaneous.

[Banedon]

Yes, umpires are acceptably accurate.

 

Then I think that's a standard that the robots can measure up to.

 

Players might be a little upset that they can't argue with the ump though. Wait till Ortiz goes all crazy with the bat on the ball/strike camera.

[MWV]

Wait till Ortiz goes all crazy with the bat on the ball/strike camera.

I think PitchFX would then be bound by 3rd Law of Robotics to preserve itself from harm, which would further complicate implementation of the system.

[Fro]

Big step forward, but they have to make balls & strikes at least challengable next.

 

They also need to speed up play, maybe by having limited "timeouts" for mound meetings, pitching changes, etc, clock on the pitcher to deliver the ball in a timely manner, and stop batters from stepping out of the box every second to adjust their gloves.

[Cubswin11]

Big step forward, but they have to make balls & strikes at least challengable next.

 

They also need to speed up play, maybe by having limited "timeouts" for mound meetings, pitching changes, etc, clock on the pitcher to deliver the ball in a timely manner, and stop batters from stepping out of the box every second to adjust their gloves.

That would be awful.

[Fro]

Big step forward, but they have to make balls & strikes at least challengable next.

 

They also need to speed up play, maybe by having limited "timeouts" for mound meetings, pitching changes, etc, clock on the pitcher to deliver the ball in a timely manner, and stop batters from stepping out of the box every second to adjust their gloves.

That would be awful.

 

It works pretty well in tennis for in/out calls... maybe takes 15 seconds for the whole process.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I suppose this is better than the status quo, but I hate challenge systems. I was really hoping for something a little more proactive where it isn't up to the managers to make a formal challenge.

[TruffleShuffle]

it's days like this i wish FJM were still around, to ridicule the inevitable barrage of terrible articles from traditionalists.