You can almost tell by the posts on here who has real world experience implementing major systems/programs.
It is never as easy as flipping a switch on. There are probably hundreds of questions that need to be addressed and to pretend they don't exist is asking for trouble.
Last edited by Brutus; 11-17-2012 at 04:59 PM.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
Look, I know what you are trying to say about how the system needs to be redone in order to accommodate the new setting of the strikezone before each pitch since it currently doesn't. Yes, it is something that would need to be added. Sportsvision/MLBAM has added about 15 new parameters since the system was first implemented. They aren't going to have trouble taking something they already do and setting it up so they can just do it more often. This is one of the best technology companies in the world. It isn't like they need to recode the entire system from scratch.
The batter knows its there and pulls his shirt down to alter the strike zone.
Or it gets disabled sliding into a base.
Or it just fails for a pitch.
Rule 37 of projects is "if something can go wrong, it will".
Rule 22 is the more moving pparts you have, the bigger the chance is something wil break.
This is the day of the expanding man...
To sum up the thread: If MLB ever decides they want to automate the ball/strike calls there is already technology available that can do the job with extreme accuracy. Of course they would have to do some testing and some minor tweaking of the system, but a system could be put in place very quickly if MLB decides to make the switch.
"I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road." Stephen Hawking