Quote:
Originally posted by senior
I can hardly wait to see how some of the World's Best grade out using this technology. I predict that the "better" ones grade out very well, and the "marginal" ones will struggle with it.
|
Ah, but will WE ever really know? The piece makes the point that the performance is on disk, presumably CD, and given to the official concerned. If I were that official, and my performance ended up on CNN, I'd be pretty pi$$ed at being second-guessed by a machine. The FOX device is only accurate to within 2 inches. Most of us should be able to call within that margin of error; about one ball width. The device MLB has bought is accurate to within 2/5ths of an inch; around 10% of a ball width - at 90+ mph ... on the outside edge ... from the slot? That's much different. The system they have initiated only works as long as those finer results remain secret within the group. The first guy who gets fired because of it will sure kick up a stink, though. Maybe they
will all have to go back to the AL Box, as you suggested.
Frankly, I'm a bit of a romantic so I hope they ALL succeed in calling the required zone accurately (most of the time). It only reflects well on the rest of us when the MLB guys are proven to be spot on with their judgement. Unfortunately that is rarely played up by the media as much as the bad calls are. It usually doesn't sell advertising. Umpires are still the people the fans LOVE to HATE!
As for your predictions, who do you perceive as the "marginal ones"? Just curious.
Cheers,
[Edited by Warren Willson on Feb 14th, 2001 at 08:05 PM]