[NotAtWork]

Why not just fully use computers, then?

If the problem is that an incomplete switch to technology left us in a chimeric state where we have the worst of both worlds, why not remove one of the two? If we remove the cameras, old umpire error will move the box up; if we remove the umpires from pitch calling, the new computers will have no trouble doing a bunch of math and moving the box up.

This seems more like an incomplete implementation of an idea, rather than a fundamental flaw.

[peeters]

> Why not just fully use computers, then?

Because that will kill interest in watching the game much more thoroughly than a more accurate strike zone. Viewers like the subtle things, like that moment's pause that leaves viewers on the edge of their seat before the ump rings the batter up on a called third strike.

Plus, imperfection causes water cooler buzz much more than perfection (people LOVE complaining about missed calls).

[jerf]

Our collective inability to conceive of the idea that perfect enforcement of previous sloppy rules may require the rules to be adjusted is scary in light of the increasing ability of computers to enforce laws, too. MLB is a sideshow by comparison. If even HN-type readers have a hard time with the idea, we're in some deep trouble over the next couple of decades.