Originally Posted by Caveman Techie
Ok, some of you guys are just being contrary to be contrary. Denying the existence of the technology we have today that is FULLY capable of doing the job.
Saying it's "unproven" and therefore you can't use it deny's the ability to prove the technology! That's a circular argument. I can understand not wanting to change the game, but I don't necessarily see this as "changing" the game as making the rules real! A strike is a strike is a strike, unless the umpire decides it's not, then it doesn't matter that the ball passed through what the rulebook defined as the strikezone. The umpires get it wrong alot, and this technology can help them get it right. Earlier in this thread someone posted a video of the Hawkeye system in Tennis. Has that solution ruined Tennis? Getting the call right is more important than some umpires ego! And honestly if it takes breaking the umpires union to get it done, after watching this season where an umpire deliberately made two horrible calls to "send a message" to a player that he thought showed him up (think it was a Toronto game, it was discussed quite a bit here). The union needs busted.
Likewise, saying something is "proven" that hasn't even been implemented for the use people are suggesting is not very prudent either.
The system was put into place to do a number of things... incorporate visual data online; give better statistical analysis of players; and further, grade umpires. The system was not designed to call balls and strikes directly.
So saying it's proven to do something it wasn't designed to do is a little bit of a stretch.