Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling
It is already proven to be far, far more accurate than the actual human umpires are.
You do realize that the same technology you speak of that is "already to be proven far, far more accurate than the actual human umpires" grade the human umpires to be 95-96% accurate, right? LOL
That equates to a difference in only about four missed/mistaken called strikes a game max, even if you assume the technology is 99% accurate (which it's not, for all the reasons listed prior).
But hey, permission to carry on with your hyperbole. You've continually overstated things previously so I shouldn't expect any differently in this case. Bottom line is that the technology is really not yet far ahead enough to declare victory. It's still only a barely negligible upgrade.