Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Put a geofence around the strike zone and a chip in the ball. Same with football, put a sensor in the ball to notify us when it crosses the goal line. Put a chip in a basketball so we know when it touches a boundary line.

Let's make sports fair and help keep human error from stealing a victory from a deserving team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have an data backing me up (I doubt there's any definitive data either way) but I'd bet you're wrong on that one.

So again players shouldn't make errors. You really can't have it both ways here either everyone has to get replaced because they make mistakes or no one does.

Fivethirtyeight has had some good articles on umps and their % accuracy.  It's right about 91%: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/playoff-umps-are-screwing-up-a-tenth-of-balls-and-strikes/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really good article about the benefits and potential problems of replacing umpires with machines: http://grantland.com/features/ben-lindbergh-possibility-machines-replacing-umpires/

 

A very interesting point from the article: However, there’s also the fact that fans screaming from the rooftops for robot umps would prefer to forget: Even an automated strike zone would have to have a human element, because the cameras and computers aren’t fully self-sufficient. The difficulty of computerizing calls varies greatly depending on pitch location, so as McKean says, “There’s going to be somebody running that machine that’s going to make judgments.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really good article about the benefits and potential problems of replacing umpires with machines: http://grantland.com/features/ben-lindbergh-possibility-machines-replacing-umpires/

 

A very interesting point from the article: However, there’s also the fact that fans screaming from the rooftops for robot umps would prefer to forget: Even an automated strike zone would have to have a human element, because the cameras and computers aren’t fully self-sufficient. The difficulty of computerizing calls varies greatly depending on pitch location, so as McKean says, “There’s going to be somebody running that machine that’s going to make judgments.”

 

That's because they're looking at the wrong system.  Put up a geofence around the strike zone, put a chip in the ball, it automatically tells you if it goes through the box or not.  No human element needed at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because they're looking at the wrong system.  Put up a geofence around the strike zone, put a chip in the ball, it automatically tells you if it goes through the box or not.  No human element needed at all.

Ahhhhh...okay.  Sounds better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because they're looking at the wrong system.  Put up a geofence around the strike zone, put a chip in the ball, it automatically tells you if it goes through the box or not.  No human element needed at all.

Is a geofence variable? As in, players of different heights have different strike zones, can that be adjusted for each player, or is it a set feature?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is a geofence variable? As in, players of different heights have different strike zones, can that be adjusted for each player, or is it a set feature?


Ah hah, there's the rub. It's definitely adjustable, but I suppose the human element lies in adjusting it to each batter's stance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because they're looking at the wrong system. Put up a geofence around the strike zone, put a chip in the ball, it automatically tells you if it goes through the box or not. No human element needed at all.

Would you do something similar and introduce 100% automated officiating for other sports? Baseball umps are far and away the most accurate of all officials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you do something similar and introduce 100% automated officiating for other sports? Baseball umps are far and away the most accurate of all officials.

It's hard to compare what Umpires have to do compared to contact sport officials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you do something similar and introduce 100% automated officiating for other sports? Baseball umps are far and away the most accurate of all officials.


Absolutely. Anywhere where we can as referenced in my post above. I'd even love to chip a hockey puck and each player on a hockey team to be sure on offside blue line situations.

The players deserve an even playing field. A poor call by an official should never cost a deserving team a win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to compare what Umpires have to do compared to contact sport officials.

Its all vision reflex. Whether someone is hitting someone or not. I know we have the benefit of slow motion and instant replay. These guys for the most part in all sports do a hell of a job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its all vision reflex. Whether someone is hitting someone or not. I know we have the benefit of slow motion and instant replay. These guys for the most part in all sports do a hell of a job.

For the most part, I don't think we currently have the technology to quickly and efficiently have electronic refereeing outside of pure bright-line rules like scoring or a lot of umpiring. Even for scoring, there would have to be judgment in addition to the electronics. Ball enters the endzone, but did it enter before the knee was down or not? Was the receiver downed by contact first?

 

But, it's also understandable why people would be attracted to the idea of increased oversight for refs. Just rewatch the MSU v. Indiana game for about 15 examples of truly terrible calls and no-calls. But, beyond a booth review of every play or increased penalties for refs who screw up, what are you supposed to do? There is no way to determine whether a tackle is a body slam besides watching the tackle and no way to review it without changing the pace of the game.

 

I think a more professional referee league (as in, full-time refs with piles of training), and some kind of system to evaluate calls and no-calls objectively and dole out appropriate punishment to refs who mess up is about all we can do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the most part, I don't think we currently have the technology to quickly and efficiently have electronic refereeing outside of pure bright-line rules like scoring or a lot of umpiring. Even for scoring, there would have to be judgment in addition to the electronics. Ball enters the endzone, but did it enter before the knee was down or not? Was the receiver downed by contact first?

 

But, it's also understandable why people would be attracted to the idea of increased oversight for refs. Just rewatch the MSU v. Indiana game for about 15 examples of truly terrible calls and no-calls. But, beyond a booth review of every play or increased penalties for refs who screw up, what are you supposed to do? There is no way to determine whether a tackle is a body slam besides watching the tackle and no way to review it without changing the pace of the game.

 

I think a more professional referee league (as in, full-time refs with piles of training), and some kind of system to evaluate calls and no-calls objectively and dole out appropriate punishment to refs who mess up is about all we can do. 

 

I agree with most of this.  I disagree with the notion that we can't implement it until we have a finished product.  Implement the things that would be easy to do, tweak it, and finish the rest.

 

Strike zone would be easiest imo.  Probably football/hockey puck crossing goal line too.  Obviously there are other factors like you mentioned such as down by contact.  I believe that could be fairly easily implemented into the system by chipping clothing.  Maybe not this month, but within 5 years.  Implement when we can.  Funding comes from progress.

 

The end result would be beautiful.  A bad call by an official cannot cost a deserving team from earning their victory.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×