Friday, November 13, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Back to Baseball
The World Series resumes tonight in New York City. Well... in the Bronx. I've never been there but I believe that's part of New York City.
From here on, it's sudden death for the Phillies. Actually it was for the last game too, but they one that one. I sure hope that they can pull it out. I think it would be great to see them repeat. But the task ahead of them is fairly monumental.
We'll see.
From here on, it's sudden death for the Phillies. Actually it was for the last game too, but they one that one. I sure hope that they can pull it out. I think it would be great to see them repeat. But the task ahead of them is fairly monumental.
We'll see.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Instant Replay Gets It Wrong
In last night's World Series game the instant replay came into play. In Major League Baseball the instant replay can only be used at this time for verifying home runs. Alex Rodriguez hit a ball that bounced off the lens of a T.V. camera in the stands in right field and fell back into play. It was initially called a double, but after reviewing the instant replay it was changed to a home run.
Now I was watching the game with the mute on, and listening to music as I watched, so I don't know if the commentators discussed this or not. But the lens of the camera was hanging out over the railing of the stands. And the downward angle of the ball's flight at the time it hit the lens did not look to me like the ball would have been a home run had the camera not been there. I sincerely doubt from the angle of descent that it would have cleared the railing and been a home run. It might have bounced off the top of the railing and into the stands, making it a home run. But it looked to me more like it would have hit off the front of the railing and fallen back into play... making the original call of "double" correct.
In sports the instant replay is only supposed to be used to reverse a call made in real time if the evidence is conclusive. To me the evidence in this case was anything but conclusive. I like the instant replay. I have been a proponent of expanding its use for close calls on the bases, etc. But if you're going to use the technology, use it right. Examine all the aspects of the evidence before making a ruling.
Now I was watching the game with the mute on, and listening to music as I watched, so I don't know if the commentators discussed this or not. But the lens of the camera was hanging out over the railing of the stands. And the downward angle of the ball's flight at the time it hit the lens did not look to me like the ball would have been a home run had the camera not been there. I sincerely doubt from the angle of descent that it would have cleared the railing and been a home run. It might have bounced off the top of the railing and into the stands, making it a home run. But it looked to me more like it would have hit off the front of the railing and fallen back into play... making the original call of "double" correct.
In sports the instant replay is only supposed to be used to reverse a call made in real time if the evidence is conclusive. To me the evidence in this case was anything but conclusive. I like the instant replay. I have been a proponent of expanding its use for close calls on the bases, etc. But if you're going to use the technology, use it right. Examine all the aspects of the evidence before making a ruling.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Phillies 1 - Yankees 1
The series is tied one game apiece. What's going to happen tonight as the series moves to Philadelphia? I sure would like to see the Phillies win the series. The Yankees knocked out my Angels.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)