Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
Damn.
It’s crazy Tatis isn’t an All Star
It’s tough for smaller markets to get players voted in anyway. I was surprised when I saw Yates was voted in.Yeah, gotta say I like that rule. It makes a difference in ur team's lean years, loved the lone Nats representatives
https://www.mlb.com/cut4/ronald-acuna-jr-blowing-bubbles-in-home-run-derby
Iconic picture we will see a lot of over the years.
I wonder how Peter hid his other two legs and tail while I went to school with him, looked like regular guy to me
best part of the ASG as I get older is when they introduce the teams.
Mic’ing tje players was cool for like a inning or two then it just gets lame
WOOOOO SOUTH KOREAAAAA
The umpires have the ability to override the computer, which considers a pitch a strike when the ball bounces and then crosses the zone. TrackMan also does not evaluate check swings
Former big leaguer Kirk Nieuwenhuis doesn't like the idea of giving umps veto power.
"If the umpire still has discretion, it defeats the purpose," said Nieuwenhuis
If the human is ultimately still making the calls, then what is the point of the robot? If they agree, it's two of the same; when they disagree, it's still the human making the call.
I am against robot umpires. It's a game, there's some level of ambiguity in the rules and how they apply at the margins. Therefore there is always some level of discretion.
This is a terrible argumentBecause the system is still greatly flawed. If you want to go directly by the robot and have no human...imagine a game ending situation with runners on where a ball bounces up there and the computer calls it a strike for strike 3. Welp, players wanted no human interference...so game over. Better luck next time.
Because the system is still greatly flawed. If you want to go directly by the robot and have no human...imagine a game ending situation with runners on where a ball bounces up there and the computer calls it a strike for strike 3. Welp, players wanted no human interference...so game over. Better luck next time.
This post is not responsive to my argument. My argument is twofold: one, the robot serves no purpose because the human makes the call anyway. Two, there will always be discretion when making calls because there is ambiguity at the margins in how the rules apply, which cannot be perfected by computer programming.Because the system is still greatly flawed. If you want to go directly by the robot and have no human...imagine a game ending situation with runners on where a ball bounces up there and the computer calls it a strike for strike 3. Welp, players wanted no human interference...so game over. Better luck next time.
@Wolfman21 imagines a future where life imitates EA and teams cheese to win ships.
When has this ever happened ever? Wot in tarnation?
This post is not responsive to my argument. My argument is twofold: one, the robot serves no purpose because the human makes the call anyway. Two, there will always be discretion when making calls because there is ambiguity at the margins in how the rules apply, which cannot be perfected by computer programming.
But I also umpire, so I don't want no stinking robot takin' mah jerb!
That teams would bounce the ball for strikes.I have no idea what this has to do with the original article i posted.
That teams would bounce the ball for strikes.
It wouldn’t end a gameI guess you didnt read the article, that stated the robot ump would call a pitch that bounced to the catcher a strike? At no point did i say teams would do it on purpose...just that it could end a game when it shouldnt.
Man....you guys are much brighter than you are showing on this page. Do better