[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by Atl Blue
HHH:

I assume all of these bangers were shot using video cameras. Unless you are using some VERY sophisticated professional equipment, video shoots at 30 frames per second. 30 frames per second means one frame every .033 seconds. I accept your theory that the human eye and brain cannot discern the timing of events that are .04 seconds apart. It sounds reasonable, and I have no evidence to think otherwise. I do think, however, that human reactions being variable, the number varies for each person, and therefore could be .05 for some people (or more) and .03 for others (or less).

But if all of these numbers hold, it also means that the video camera cannot discern the difference with much more accuracy than can the human eye and brain. To use video "evidence" means the call was actually not as close as .04 seconds, or you just got "lucky" catching the "actual" moment on video.

I don't dispute that on a banger, it basically comes down to not much more than a guess, and we aren't even getting into the issues of the difference in the rates of sound and light travelling, meaning the ump that relies on the "sight (light)" of the foot hitting the bag versus the "sound" of the glove hitting the mitt has just given an advantage to the runner as well.

In reality, a banger is just that. Like it or not, even the best umps are making a guess sometimes. Sometimes we guess "right", sometimes we guess "wrong". But I do not think our "guesses" are any more right or wrong than on calls that were decided by more than .033 seconds, which are the only ones that video could conclusively verify as "right" or "wrong", than they are on calls that were more distinct. In other words, every ump misses the not so close ones occassionally. One would hope that missing these decreases with experience, but I know that is not always true.

Sometimes we miss them. But there is an old saying that I was taught in one of my very first clinics MANY years ago:

Whether I'm right or whether I'm wrong, I'm right.

Atl Blue;

I learned something valuable from you today. Thank you. After I wrote my first response to you, I went back and reviewed my four part series written two years ago about the 0.04 second time frame of uncertainty. You can read it if you are a subscriber at:

http://baseball.officiating.com/x/article/2662

Anyway, in my series I discuss that I had someone tape me making wacker calls in real games. I write that I was unable to determine if I was right or wrong in most of the plays. Now I know why. I had a regular VCR with 30 frames per second.

Peter