Underutilized Technologies Or Overblown Egos?
 

No, not another thread on IR (which should be instituted as per my previous posts) but on the use of the Internet, web pages and hahdheld or docked devices.

Another officials service has been offering online testing for sports officials (I won't mention out of deference to this site) so the technology is there. This means that distance from the testing site(s) or timing to get a test done is not a reason.

MLB umps booted a BOO call and a simple handheld device like a Palm Treo or other PDA (with rules only on it) or docked device (umpire's access only) could have been used to search the rule and apply it correctly. Instead, we got crap.

The common horn I hear blown is how this could embarass umpires, we all heard the whining and Cheetos with Questec and the rest. Looks like everyone survived just fine to me and the strike zones are more consistent than ever.

Point: it's not technology, the cost or the implmentation that is holding the advancement of better officiating, it umpires, ump orgs and perhaps the governing bodies (like MLB) themselves.

So much for getting the call right. :o

How would having easy access to rules embarrass the umpires? I find that umpires look silly when they boot an obvious judgment call or misapply a rule (like the BOO mistake), so I would think umpires would welcome technology as it would only enhance their credibility on the field.

Though I don't ump baseball (only softball here), I'll throw in my two cents.

The rule book itself is very hand-held. I don't know the particular BOO situation you're talking about, but my guess is that the umpires were sure enough (albeit incorrectly) of their ruling, and felt no need to go to a rule book. So, even if they had some sort of PDA device, they wouldn't have used it, because they thought they had it right. Otherwise, you would have to suggest that before they make every ruling, they need to check the rule book, even if they're sure of it.

Once again, I don't know the particular example you're talking about, but if what you're saying is right (and I don't doubt that it is), then they just got it wrong. It happens.

Can't disagree, when was the last time any ump went to the rule book on the field?

The assumption I was making is that if there is a quick search device, then MLB would have approved it and it would be used. That would mean MLB would actually give a crap about getting rules right.

We're on the same page here, Bro!

I find that fans are silly when they think they know the rules and actually shout them out. Or when they think they see the play better from over a hundred feet away, with a crappy angle and through a chain link fence, whilst looking out of the corner of their eye because they're BS'n with the guy next to them when the play occurs. Another excellent topic brought to us by (oh okay Bob) fitump56.

Your post, I haven't a clue what is has to do with any part of this thread. :confused: What did we miss?

Evidently you didn't even read the post you quoted. If it's to hard for you to figure out, jus axe me, I'll 'splain it.

Splain it.:o

I wrote: "I find that fans are silly when they think they know the rules and actually shout them out. Or when they think they see the play better from over a hundred feet away, with a crappy angle and through a chain link fence, whilst looking out of the corner of their eye because they're BS'n with the guy next to them when the play occurs."

As you can see my post was in reply to the admitted fan and coach who doesn't know much about the rules or mechanics of umpiring. Simply pointing out how silly we find them to be when they do those things.

As for "technology" enhancing an umpire's credibility my personal opinion is that it would undermine it. Coaches and fans (not knowing the rules themselves) would want the umpires to go to the "book" every time something happens that they don't understand and/or don't agree with the way the umpire ruled. Bottom line, you don't need any fancy device to help you with the rules. Stick with the rulebook, it will fit in your back pocket if you find it necessary to keep it with you at all times, otherwise, keep it in your car. Have a problem, go get it, look it up, come back and tell'em you were right and play on.;)

There is clear precedence set by college and pro football, for instance, that limits and penalizes potetnial abuse.

Please NFump, no one does or will do this. What good is it in your car? By having a quick lookup device, and the above limitations, you get calls right. See BOO by major leaguers recently.

Waking from your dream.......:D

That's for instant replay, not rules.

Then put it in your pocket or ball bag. Ya don't need no "quick lookup device". If you can carry a "QLD" then you can carry a rulebook.

HAHAHAHAHA!

I have my opion of the matter. But this is one you can experiment with yourself. Stick your rulebook in your back pocket next time you take the field. When you have a question, stop and look it up. Note what happens. Repeat over the course of a season. Report back on how it went.

Priceless... simply priceless.... :D

Need a Rulebook?
 

Get off the field!

Not well when it rains on us 1 out of 3 games. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by fitump56
There is clear precedence set by college and pro football, for instance, that limits and penalizes potetnial abuse. Please NFump, no one does or will do this. What good is it in your car? By having a quick lookup device, and the above limitations, you get calls right. See BOO by major leaguers recently.

Waking from your dream.......:D
It's not a "carry the rulebook" concept. Sure, we will see lots of liars who will post how they carry their rulebook in their back pockets and review them at will. :rolleyes: As if they could read them without carrying their glasses, or have several dozen copies when the rain ruins them.

MLB can commit to the best application of the rules by using technologies that are widely utilized by second tier junior corporate types. The PDA device follows the commitment, not leads it.

Do we see MLB or any other umps taking the lead to use simple, everyday tech to enhance the accuracy of their arbitration?

Underutilized Technologies Or Overblown Egos?

Exactly how does using a PDA as opposed to a rule book allow for the "best application of the rules"? Okay, you don't "carry" it, it's off to the side and you can go to it at any time. Sounds like it could be the rulebook too. A "technology" isn't necessary.

1) PDAs are searchable by keyword
2) Rain does not render them useless
3) Text size can be adjusted
4) Assistance from remote officials (chat, email, etc)
5) Makes billion $$ MLB look like they give a dman about accuracy
6) Rule book lookup non existent; no reason now
7) Fans have them and use them for the very same purpose DUH
8) Ten more reasons

1) Index
2) It's an electronic device rain does render it useless. If it's under cover so can the rulebook.
3) They make rulebooks with larger text.
4) Remote official can be in booth or reached via another electronic device called a telephone.
5) Pure PR and nothing more
6) If they aren't looking it up in the rulebook now they damn sure won't be looking it up on a PDA.
7) Never, ever have I seen a fan using a PDA to look up rules at a game of any type. They wouldn't understand them even if they did.
8) Every one you come up with would apply to a rulebook, 'cept it don't needs no battrees.
9) A new technology is not necessary, a system is already in place that works very well. You may have heard of it, it's called a Protest.

Of course that would mean the coaches would have to know the rules also. Wait they could look it up on the PDA and then come running out with it and undermine the umpires on the field with a rule they thought the umpires missed. Except they only looked up part of the rule (those screens are pretty small, hey let's use a portable computer!)(Screw that, let's just get the big board on the stadium wall hooked up and post the rules right there for everyone). The game is fine the way it is. It don't needs no IR or QLD to hep it along. Sorry bra you just haven't been able to convince me of the need. Deposit it in the circular file, buh-bye.

Not as quick as a keyword searh and doesn't give you all the possibilities

Look up "hardened", electronic devices that are made for warfafre.

And they are the size of the Bible. My butt's not that big, YBMV, call me when a rule boook is backlighted.

PDA is real time, on time, at time chat. And it is recordable.

Fo r the third time, see above regarding commitment. You think officials in toher sports say "I don't want to be bothered with IR" when the commitment is made and their employers demand it?

It's a New World, join it.

Technologies prevent protests and anything, technological or not, that improves the accuracy of officiating the game should be utilized.

Underutilized Technologies Or Overblown Egos?

Egos. O r maybe you would prefer to just get the call wrong and be done with it.

YGBSM! By the time your done typing in your "keyword" I've found what I'm looking for. Goes along with knowing the rulebook. Lame.



Fitty, it's really deep where you just jumped. (That would be off the deep end) That's just completely ridiculous. Not that they make them, that you suggest they use them for a baseball game. Really lame.


Last I looked fields are lighted as bright as day. If you need larger text buy a pair of glasses. LameO.

So is the guy in the booth and on the phone. Another lame reason.



How about committing to learning the rules. If your memory fails, go to the rulebook. (The paper version as technology isn't necessary here). Instant replay is a completely different subject. It's really lame when you try to change the subject to something else to prove your point.



Really? Wow! Guess what? You still don't have fans using PDAs, QLDs or any other technological device to look up rules during a game. Another ridiculously lame attempt to prove your point. Get real.



Yep and the technology exists to completely replace all officials in every sport. There's a little something called the human element of the game. That goes for the players, coaches and officials.

Underutilized Technologies Or Overblown Egos?

Nice try but no cigar. Thanks for playing, the consolation prize is the game of "Clue" by Parker Brothers. Now you can say you have one.

Bottom line is some type of device to lookup rules is not necessary. Sure it would be neat'o but necessary, nope. Wouldn't do anything for improving the accuracy of the officiating that just having the rulebook there wouldn't do.

Hey all,

Technology does not always make things "better". Take, for instance, calculators. They do make doing math equations easier and faster, BUT, what has happened to kids knowledge of how to do math WITHOUT the use of a calculator?

A pda, like a rule book, in the pocket or ball bag or off to the side, could be used as an aid for ironing out "difficult" circumstances. It is not needed with PROPER rules knowledge.

LomUmp:cool:

Hey all,

Another way to look at it is this...

A rule book, pda, or any other reference source, that would be on site, is a crutch. A crutch is used when something is broken or not complete. If the rule knowledge of the official in any sport is complete, then the crutch is not needed. The manager's and coach's understanding of the rules are, in a lot of instances, misapplied. If they think that the umpire is misinterpreting a rule, then, as said before, that is what a protest is for.

LomUmp:cool:

Obviously, the MLB guys who blew the BOO call need a crutch. Or assistance in getting the call right. Let's call this asssitance, get rid of the limping around, half capable image of "crutch".

Which it never is....

tChoose, a protest or a rule properly applied using assistance?

I make my living in the compter technology business. You?

You're dreaming if you think this is the case regading lookups. Applied technologies in the baseball world, they are already heavily invested. They, I and we know what you don't. No sense in arguing, NF, you haven't the educational, operational and technological basis from which to do so.

The only reason that MLB does not use any known, tried and true technology is that they choose not to. I question why t is that they choose not to when the obvious result is a better officiated game.

This is self-evident; MLB isn't concerned with best efforts accuracy in officiating. Same with IR. And a dozen other technologies that would absolutely enhance accuracy.

So, back to:

Underutilized Technologies Or Overblown Egos?

If MLB umps were "for the sport" and its best interests, then this entire thread would be without value. They would be the first ones to promote accuracy. But they don't. :mad:

Finally something on which we can agree.

Edited to clarify: I mean that the thread has run it's course. Some like "all" technology; some like "no" technology. We won't resolve it further here.