07-29-2003, 04:20 AM
I would be completely against this. Brain makes a great case, and I agree with most of what he said, but to add to it:
Ultimately, balls and strikes have been a judgement call for as long as baseball has been around. To say that the game shouldn't evolve is nonsense, but should it evolve this way? To make pitchers, essentially, slaves to the machine? The strike zone is the one boundary in sports that changes with every different player, and it's up to the pitcher to work within the strike zone as defined by the individual he's facing to the best of his ability, and it's up to the umpire to use his discretion to interpret whether the pitcher is working within these defined boundaries. To leave this interpretation to an unthinking, unbreathing machine is to strip baseball of one of its most essential and endearing qualities - it's no longer man against man with a third party as impartial judge. It's now man against man, but under the strict unchanging unthinking guidelines as programmed into a machine. I can't liken this to instant replay in football, because even that leaves judgement calls (ie pass interference) to the discretion of the officials. The NHL doesn't review boarding calls, even though, like baseball's strike zone and football's pass interference, there are clearly rules in place. Only calls with hard, physically defined and visible bounds are able to be contested.
The Questec tool is useful in evaluating an umpire's performance, or in spotting problem areas in a pitcher or a hitter's game. In no way should it be used to enforce the rules that umpires have enforced successfully for the entire history of the game.
Ultimately, balls and strikes have been a judgement call for as long as baseball has been around. To say that the game shouldn't evolve is nonsense, but should it evolve this way? To make pitchers, essentially, slaves to the machine? The strike zone is the one boundary in sports that changes with every different player, and it's up to the pitcher to work within the strike zone as defined by the individual he's facing to the best of his ability, and it's up to the umpire to use his discretion to interpret whether the pitcher is working within these defined boundaries. To leave this interpretation to an unthinking, unbreathing machine is to strip baseball of one of its most essential and endearing qualities - it's no longer man against man with a third party as impartial judge. It's now man against man, but under the strict unchanging unthinking guidelines as programmed into a machine. I can't liken this to instant replay in football, because even that leaves judgement calls (ie pass interference) to the discretion of the officials. The NHL doesn't review boarding calls, even though, like baseball's strike zone and football's pass interference, there are clearly rules in place. Only calls with hard, physically defined and visible bounds are able to be contested.
The Questec tool is useful in evaluating an umpire's performance, or in spotting problem areas in a pitcher or a hitter's game. In no way should it be used to enforce the rules that umpires have enforced successfully for the entire history of the game.