On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Joe Hass <[email protected]> wrote:
> You're one of those "human element" people, eh? > > (pulls out old-fashioned pocket spiral notebook, opens it, leafs to a > particular page, makes a small mark, closes notebook, puts back in pocket) > I see I have made it into your book. I am, but not in the sense of celebrating mistakes because they make the game more human. There are always steps that can be taken to reduce officiating mistakes. But relying on technology to officiate takes the game out of the level at which they are played, which trivializes and alienates it. We may be able to super slo mo the hard hit grounder down the third base line, zoom in and 360 exactly where the ball first hits the ground, and determine that the ump's call of foul was "wrong" because at 1 fame per 10 seconds, magnified 10,000 times, we can see that one atom of the ball is actually making contact with one atom of chalk. But that atomic level has nothing to do with how the game is played, viewed or enjoyed at the human level. That is an artificial level of scrutiny that gives rise to a false sense of confidence in the absolute accuracy of the game. Does a replay at regular speed clearly show that the batter was a full step ahead of the ball at first base? I don't mind letting the umps look at that and using it to change an erroneous out call. But anything else is self-delusion. -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
