What is Digg?56 Comments
- mdmanic, on 09/03/2008, -1/+19Do headlines that are questions need question marks
- ryrocker, on 09/02/2008, -5/+19nah
i think the human element adds more to the game...
soccer wouldnt be as fun if i couldnt get away with a few penalties here and there...
and being a soccer ref myself, i let a few of the minor penalties slip by because enforcing all of them would just be a drag on the game... - 5xSTUN, on 09/03/2008, -0/+11I can see the crowds booing a call they don't like... instead of "kill the umpire!" they'll be yelling, "Upgrade the firmware! Run a diagnostic!"
- ascguy, on 09/03/2008, -2/+8Nope. Are you going to replace the players as well? Let's just make everything one big video game.
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -0/+5things that involving 'judging' are not real sports.
end. - directedition, on 09/03/2008, -2/+7But you can't yell and curse at computers and hurt their feelings! And you can't debate the accuracy of the call or the loyalties of the umpire, etc etc etc. That's all part of the game!
- NightVortez, on 09/03/2008, -3/+8No matter how good you are in tennis, you'll never be as good as the wall.
- Antimatter3009, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4Yes, for everything that's an easy yes/no question. Things like whether the ball is in, or if it's a strike, etc. are absolute yes/no calls that should be consistent. If a computer can be set up to make a decision at the same speed as a human (ie instantly), it should be done. Things like penalties in football are often judgment calls that a computer shouldn't be making, so those should be left alone.
As long as the players stay human, every game has plenty of the 'human element' for me. - kingofinternet, on 09/03/2008, -2/+5one of the best parts of sports is hating the ref.
and you can love the ref, like this guy, i love this guy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-3cuCEt9k8 - bstew22, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3?
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -1/+4It's impossible for many sports.
I don't see how a computer is going to call holding on an offensive lineman. Or unsportsman-like conduct. Baseball players would be extremely limited if they had to wear sensors and stand in a particular spot for a computer to determine if it's a strike or not.
But they would do a better job at calling things that go out of bounds in most sports. That's about it I guess. - inactive, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3Yes, then the players with robots and then computers to report it. Then I won't have to see stupid articles like this anymore! :D
- J3553, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3i understand the desire to preserve the human element in sports, but i don't believe the outcome of a sports event should ever be decided by an official's ability to properly do their job. so i believe computers should be able to make some calls and everything else should be reviewable by instant replay. it doesn't undermine the officials. everyone makes mistakes.
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3As far as baseball goes, it would be hard to institute a computerized strikezone because by definition, every player has a different one. It's not any specific measurement,
"The Strike Zone is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the top of the knees. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball."
Every player has a different body and different stance...obviously anything is possible with technology, but I can't imagine where you would begin in implementing that kind of tool.
For the most part, the umps get it right anyway. I'm all for instant replay though, but not on balls and strikes. You have well over 100 pitches to figure out how the ump is calling the game, it shouldn't be an issue. - bigstinky, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3With the amount of gaming the refs have been pulling, I would want something in place to help keep them honest. Remember two years ago, the NBA ref busted for non calls, as well as helping to send certain players to the line. He was part of a betting ring scandal. At least, replay should be used to review all calls objected to. Kind of like in Football with the red flag. (understanding that to keep the speed as well as the pace of the game up, these calls are limited.)
Last year, in the NHL playoffs, Tomas Holmstrom was called for goaltender interference on 3 separate occasions where video replay would have proved him innocent, thereby allowing 3 goals subsequently taken away, and ultimately changing the scope of the game. I cannot stand when a bad call affects the game, either way. - serif69, on 09/03/2008, -2/+4There are too many things that are discretionary or judgment calls, especially when it comes to infractions. A computer can't make judgment calls.
- Antimatter3009, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2I understand all that, but I don't like it. I would much prefer it be consistent. I know umps and refs can get audited if they're really bad, but what annoys me more is when there are a few bad calls here and there. The problem is that obvious bad calls can change the course of the game. Again, not everything can be computerized, but in cases where we can I think should be consistent. That "unknown factor" is actually just a bit of randomness, and I prefer that the outcomes of games be, as much as possible, reliant on the players involved rather than the umps/refs.
- aspec, on 09/03/2008, -2/+4Now you're being ridiculous. One should be awarded for talent, skill and luck instead of the eyes of a corruptable human being. I imagine the women's gymnastics finals in Beijing would have been very different if it were possible to score with an impartial judge.
- bstew22, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3In baseball umpires have different strike zones, that's just the game. You argue with the ump (as a batter) you better expect more strikes to be called. You argue as the pitcher, ball 4, ball 8, ball 12.... you get the picture.
It adds variety and it adds an unknown factor.
People must realize too that umpires and ref all get "audited" for lack of a better term, on their performance. If they just make lousy calls all the time... they are going to lose their job. - Brightstar, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2I don't know, that wall started to fall apart after the beating I gave it in Wii Sports.
- britoca, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1then they need to be made objective...
- swraman, on 09/12/2008, -0/+1never replace them. I think what they have now is a good balance.
- dOOBiEx213, on 09/02/2008, -7/+8Yes. I've lost all faith in sports as it is... it seems they're all headed the path of the WWE.
- Myztry, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2The game can be as much about gaming the umpire and audience, as gaming the opposition.
If we wanted it all spot on, then we might as well just run simulations...
No injuries, no doping, no bribes, and no sport... - BoneStamp, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2That's not a ref, it's a reindeer.
- superman46n2, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2it would only work in baseball, the other big 4 sports are more subjective
- BoneStamp, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1It's either Dancer, Prancer or Vixen... not completely sure.
- JeddHampton, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2I for one welcome our new "I for one welcome or new _____ overlords" overlords.
- britoca, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1hmmm, that's exactly why soccer, or correctly called football, is a disgrace to watch.
- BoneStamp, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Yes, and when it makes an erroneous call it should explode before they replace it with a new one.
- britoca, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1YES!
- inactive, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Anything where you sacrifice a colossal amount of brain cells every match is not a sport, they are not sustainably developing athletes. They are beefcake chumps with the killswitch in full.
At least WWE 'performers' can still execute primary brain functions after a few years.
You're right, there are exceptional cases, but most 'pro' athletes are bascially children, because they grew up kings and queens and had millions by 18, 16 in some cases. - shiftless, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Maybe if everyone playing were a robot I'd be interested
- joeanon, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I don't think it needs computers, but each sport can decide on it's own and have been.
It's just a game, not a NASA rendering of asteroid paths that will affect all life on earth.
If you lose one to a refs bad call.. you say oh well because you know eventually you'll win one from a refs bad call. The law of averages works well enough and the actual outcome isn't really that important.
It's like they say, getting there is half the fun. The flawed system of sports is also half the fun. Perfecting it with computers really just takes some of the unpredictability out of the game. - inactive, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I just wonder how long it'll be before Questec becomes more fully integrated into day-to-day baseball operations.
- adamroach, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Thank you! Saved me some typing.
- RockSlice, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I think computer referees should be used anytime the call can be reduced to a simple set of "if these situations occur." Obviously things like Unsportsmanlike Conduct require the judgement of a human, and the computer referees would still need a human at least watching, to make sure it's not an obvious buggy call.
The sports world is already relying on computers and machinery to decide the winner. Take Phelps' 1/100 of a second win. Judges watching might have thought he came in second, but he pushed the plate first.
The competition that needs it most, IMO, is gymnastics, though that would be a very complicated system to program - Joecrook, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I figure if I've seen errors in recent video game sports that don't produce the results they're suppose to then I can't see allowing computers to enforce every rule in any sport.
- ThatDeadDude, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1A lot of people are missing the point that the entire decision doesn't have to be dictated by computer - it's just nice to have advanced facilities available for hard calls. In this part of the world, we have a lot of TMOs (television match officials) in sports such as rugby and cricket. They just use a lot of instant reply to make calls that the refs/umpires on the ground can't.
- AbsurdParadox, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1if(team == favorite){
touchdown = 1;
} else {
touchdown = 0;
} - bps04a, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Slate is well known for taking contrarian attitudes for no reason other then to throw a bunch of three dollar words together and act smug.
- baldbean, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1In baseball yes. I am so sick of the shadow swipe on the double play. Your a pro. Step on the bag, stick in there, and take the slide or just jump up after you throw the ball. I am also sick of the safe call on the throw to third because the umpire picked a ***** position to call the play from in the first place. Also the strike zone changes from umpire to umpire. The strike zone should be the same for everyone. Stop favoring certain pitchers because of who they are. i already have the blue print if anyone is ready. The game may get a little boring though. Hell, some people think baseball is boring enough with the current implementation.
- theycensoredme, on 09/03/2008, -0/+0How is MMA "uber-lame"? Its the closest thing we have to modern-day gladiators.
I should also ask, do you know any athletes? "Under-developed, super-talented people who do one thing well?" Although I agree in a lot of cases, you can't generalize. Most of them have college educations and, while some had an easy ride to their degree, most of them had to work for it. - coyote1284, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1Bow before me!
- BoneStamp, on 09/03/2008, -2/+2If you answer a question with a question, does it need a question mark.
- Donniehoward08, on 09/03/2008, -0/+0It's not a favoring thing at all in baseball, it's more or less what they feel is the strike zone...with most pro umps the strike zone stays constant with each pitch
- BadenBall, on 09/03/2008, -0/+0look on the bright side, there wouldn't be gambling scandal ie Donahgy
- Donniehoward08, on 09/03/2008, -0/+0nope...keep the humans, as a pitcher in baseball it is half the game trying to beat the Ump and find his feel for the strike zone, with a computer you could never have the personal outing while throwing...it would just get generic and boring without the emotional bad calls and the arguing...it's part of sports
- chrisemc, on 09/03/2008, -2/+1Isn't removing the human element from the game what we want here? There are plenty of instances in sports and otherwise where removing human error from the equation would have resulted in a more favorable outcome. I sure as hell would have liked to have removed the "human element" from the 2000 Presidential election.
When we say that computers aren't intelligent enough to make those borderline calls, what we are really saying is that we don't think they are intelligent enough yet... -
Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is