Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Sporting Events
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 10-29-2005, 03:33 AM
pryor15 pryor15 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: possum lodge
Posts: 624
Default Re: A computer to call balls & strikes - why not?

[ QUOTE ]
Because we won't have a big fat guy yelling "STEEEEEEEE-RIKE ONE!!!"


[/ QUOTE ]

plus, someone's gotta call plays at the plate. what's he supposed to do the rest of the game?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-29-2005, 03:47 AM
Benholio Benholio is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 238
Default Re: A computer to call balls & strikes - why not?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Because we won't have a big fat guy yelling "STEEEEEEEE-RIKE ONE!!!"


[/ QUOTE ]

plus, someone's gotta call plays at the plate. what's he supposed to do the rest of the game?

[/ QUOTE ]

He can look at the LCD display on his wrist that says "strike" or "ball" and then give it his personalized (and possibly ambiguous *cough*) indication.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-29-2005, 10:16 AM
CollinEstes CollinEstes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Afro-cising
Posts: 516
Default Re: A computer to call balls & strikes - why not?

I'm not talking about framing, which is what most people call recieving. The big league catchers don't really frame the ball in the aspect of making it look like a strike. Really what you are trying to do is give the umpire the best look at the pitch. Piazza couldn't get low strikes because he would block the umpire's view and if he does that they shouldn't get the call. If you watched Ausmus, he always gives the umpire I nice consistent clean look at each pitch. There is also alot of dialogue that goes on with the ump and catcher at most levels that nobody gets to here or be aknowledged for. It is a cool part of the game if you are a catcher to get to where you feel like you are working together with the umpire. Perfect example of something most people might not know about the right thing to do to keep umps happy is if they get a pitch fouled off their body in any way you always go talk to your pitcher unless the ump tells you he doesn't need a minute. Umps do the same thing for catchers by rubbing the ball alittle longer, etc.

Working umps was one of my favorite parts of catching, and I would hate to see them just start putting big donkeys like Piazza back there because recieving pitches is no longer important.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-29-2005, 12:10 PM
tdarko tdarko is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: watching channel 9
Posts: 824
Default Re: A computer to call balls & strikes - why not?

[ QUOTE ]
'm not talking about framing, which is what most people call recieving. The big league catchers don't really frame the ball in the aspect of making it look like a strike. Really what you are trying to do is give the umpire the best look at the pitch. Piazza couldn't get low strikes because he would block the umpire's view and if he does that they shouldn't get the call. If you watched Ausmus, he always gives the umpire I nice consistent clean look at each pitch. There is also alot of dialogue that goes on with the ump and catcher at most levels that nobody gets to here or be aknowledged for. It is a cool part of the game if you are a catcher to get to where you feel like you are working together with the umpire. Perfect example of something most people might not know about the right thing to do to keep umps happy is if they get a pitch fouled off their body in any way you always go talk to your pitcher unless the ump tells you he doesn't need a minute. Umps do the same thing for catchers by rubbing the ball alittle longer, etc.

Working umps was one of my favorite parts of catching, and I would hate to see them just start putting big donkeys like Piazza back there because recieving pitches is no longer important.

[/ QUOTE ]
this is a really good post.

big league umpires hate catchers that "frame" pitches, it pisses them off and they will actually start to take pitches away. all they want is for you to be "quiet" behind the dish, and do the best job of catching the ball in a presentable manner for the umpire as collin said.

the catcher's that take away strikes are the ones that move to much blocking the sight of an umpire, or ones that feel it necessary to do too much and then resulting of them not getting any calls.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-29-2005, 12:22 PM
andyfox andyfox is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,677
Default Re: A computer to call balls & strikes - why not?

Nice post.

"There is also alot of dialogue that goes on with the ump and catcher at most levels that nobody gets to hear or be acknowledged for."

Stengel always said Yogi was a genius at this. And being small, Berra would get down real low. Whitey Ford loved Elston Howard, but he claimed he got more calls with Berra precisely because Howard was the bigger man.

Stengel, who managed Joe Dimaggio and Mickey Mantle, when asked for the secret to his success with the Yankees, said, "I never manage a game without my man." By whom he meant Yogi.

BTW, the pitcher who said what he said about Piazza is Al Leiter. I don't think either of them lurk here, so I'm OK with revealing this.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-29-2005, 01:11 PM
masse75 masse75 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 0
Default Re: A computer to call balls & strikes - why not?

It would give Cubs fans one less thing to cry about.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-29-2005, 08:44 PM
daveymck daveymck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 388
Default Re: A computer to call balls & strikes - why not?

There is possible technology available, in cricket here tv developed a system that can judge the trajectory of the ball isnt used by the umpires currently only the tv. The ball is delivered at around 60-100 miles per hour dependant on the bowler and the replay is shown on tv in seconds. Is based around technology used for missle tracking.

For most sports there is a dilemma and discussion of how much technology should be used, football is one sport that the argument comes up again and again but nothing happen. But US football seemed to emabrace it then pull away from it so its hard really to strike balances between letting games flow and utilizing whats available to assist in correct decisions.

An article Here on hawkeye with a picture as example when on tv though the ball actully moves.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-29-2005, 11:36 PM
IggyWH IggyWH is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Pittsburgh - FIESTA BOWL BITCHES!
Posts: 317
Default Re: A computer to call balls & strikes - why not?

[ QUOTE ]
It's not reliable, it can accurately tell inside and outside, but it can correctly call based on height, because it changes for every batter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not only does it change for every batter, but it also changes everytime a batter moves.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.