Leaving early

[TALSOONER]

Here is why FSU didn't make the SUPERS:

"The Seminoles clawed one run back in the third inning and loaded the bases. Shelby McKenzie delivered a hit that, momentarily, cleared the bases and seemingly gave Florida State a 4-2 lead. However, UCF challenged the play, claiming Anna Hinde left second base early.

The review of the play ruled in UCF's claim. As a result of the costly base-running mistake, Hinde was called out and all three runs came off the board."

Don't want to be Anna Hinde, but it shows how important one play can be..........

[OUBeliever56A]

OUCH !!!

[TN Sooner]

The application of this rule can be really painful - I guess I’m glad we learned hard lessons early this year.

I’m not sure what can be done, but I’d like to see some sort of revision - with all the different pitching motions, it becomes very hard to time the release. Perhaps change the “penalty” to the same as a hit with a foot outside the box - opposing team gets option of taking the play or a complete redo, but not an out. The “out of box” penalty was changed recently - maybe do something similar here.

Another thing I thought of was change the timing from pitch release to leaving the rubber. But that would make steals much easier.

And, my empathy for FSU doesn’t run very deep for a mistake in the 3rd inning - they had plenty of chances to overcome.

[1KCSoonerFan]

I agree with TN. If the purpose of rules is to allow the performance of the teams to determine the outcome, then those rules must be proportionate to the violation. I'm sure that is the intent - and it all works pretty well until an out-of-the-norm situation happens. Then, a revision process comes into play. But then there is the possibility of unintended consequences to that rule change. Rules can be a dog chasing its tail in some respects.

On the other hand, a set of rules can be "fair" if known clearly and enforced equally before and during competition the way I see it. But even here, rules can be made that favor one side more than another. Imagine Bama gaining so much control over the game that they make rules that disproportionately favor them forever, not just a season or two. Maybe good for Bama, or another team or group of teams, but not necessarily good for the Game.

Not sure why the illegal pitching rules changed. I know there is a reason based on something hopefully rational, I'm just not clear about it.

Outside of this particular situation, I am always intrigued how coaches/teams still find ways to manipulate the rules in order to gain an advantage. (Like all the visits to the pitcher, or challenges about this or that, in order to stall the opposition when they are in a groove or have momentum. Legal, but frustrating for the fans on the rallying side.)

What role will AI play in the future? Will that solve anything? Is it okay to have the human element in human games?

In any case, the reduction in the amount of time it takes to make rulings based on challenges would be a definite improvement to the game!

[AustinTXSooner]

If we want the time of reviews to be reduced, there's a simple way. Video review was first intended to correct egregious mistakes, not to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to get the call "correct". Most reviewers have taken this to another level. I would propose that they don't use slow-motion on reviews. If you can't tell from live-action play speed, the call stands. That should make reviews a lot faster.

Maybe sometime in the future, when we have enough camera angles at every game, we can let AI determine the correct call. But right now, softball is not a profitable sport, so adding thousands of dollars of review equipment to every field is not an option.

I've been really impressed with MLBs pitch challenge. Fast and accurate. But that system costs a ton. So I asked ChatGPT:

1. High-speed cameras / radar systems:
MLB uses systems like TrackMan or Hawk-Eye to track every pitch in 3D. TrackMan’s baseball system costs roughly $50,000–$100,000 per unit, plus yearly maintenance fees.
2. Stadium installation and infrastructure:
Mounting multiple high-speed cameras around the stadium, integrating them into replay rooms, and connecting them to software can run $100,000–$300,000 per stadium depending on complexity.
3. Replay rooms and operator staffing:
The rooms need monitors, computers, and trained operators—probably an additional $50,000–$100,000 for setup per stadium.

Rough estimate per MLB stadium: $200,000–$500,000 to fully implement pitch tracking and challenge review.

[1KCSoonerFan]

"Video review was first intended to correct egregious mistakes, not to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to get the call "correct"."

Something definitely changed from what you describe as the original intent and what is in practice at the moment. Mission creep? Was the original intention to only get the "egregious calls" right? Not saying that's not true, only that I did not hear it described that way. Maybe it DOES take more time to make right, true, and factual decisions. Patients is on me. I'm no advocate of an incorrect decision made quickly simply for the sake of time savings. Which brings up AI....

You are the first to use AI to make a point about something related to softball in response to a question about AI's role in softball in my experience. This is what I mean about the use of AI. No shade, just interesting.

Hoping all the calls go OU's way!

[TALSOONER]

Players have grown up leaving just as the ball is released and not often caught if they leave a little early. It will take awhile for them to realize the slow-motion and dugout players will catch them. I like the rule, players just need to adjust.

[Brisket]

If we want the time of reviews to be reduced, there's a simple way. Video review was first intended to correct egregious mistakes, not to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to get the call "correct". Most reviewers have taken this to another level. I would propose that they don't use slow-motion on reviews. If you can't tell from live-action play speed, the call stands. That should make reviews a lot faster.

Maybe sometime in the future, when we have enough camera angles at every game, we can let AI determine the correct call. But right now, softball is not a profitable sport, so adding thousands of dollars of review equipment to every field is not an option.

I've been really impressed with MLBs pitch challenge. Fast and accurate. But that system costs a ton. So I asked ChatGPT:

1. High-speed cameras / radar systems:
MLB uses systems like TrackMan or Hawk-Eye to track every pitch in 3D. TrackMan’s baseball system costs roughly $50,000–$100,000 per unit, plus yearly maintenance fees.
2. Stadium installation and infrastructure:
Mounting multiple high-speed cameras around the stadium, integrating them into replay rooms, and connecting them to software can run $100,000–$300,000 per stadium depending on complexity.
3. Replay rooms and operator staffing:
The rooms need monitors, computers, and trained operators—probably an additional $50,000–$100,000 for setup per stadium.

Rough estimate per MLB stadium: $200,000–$500,000 to fully implement pitch tracking and challenge review.

Absolutely yes on the reviews. Going frame-by-frame, trying to sync up different camera angles. It's gotten ridiculous. I've said it for years, specifically for football reviews but would apply it to softball too - you olnly get 1 look at each camera angle at live speed. If you can't make a determination after that, play stands as called.

Maybe the ABS system is too expensive for each school to pay for and install, but it should be implimented at the WCWS. They used to at least have the strike zone rectangle on the TV, but I think they got rid of it b/c the umps missed so many calls. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think we'd see strikeouts go up exponentially & offensive numbers fall off a cliff if the strike zone was called accurately.

[AustinTXSooner]

Patients is on me. I'm no advocate of an incorrect decision made quickly simply for the sake of time savings.

So why do we have the action clock? Because TV wants a more predictable game length and that's where the money is. They will start slapping a time limit on the review and enforcing it soon.

I didn't understand the point you were trying to make about AI.

[AustinTXSooner]

It's also why you only get two challenges.

[1KCSoonerFan]

AustinTX.

My point about AI was about using AI to answer a question about AI. Not that it's a bad thing, only that it seemed perfect for the times we are living in right now as AI takes a greater role in our lives.

I appreciate your reminders about the other rules of the game that try and speed things up. I do like the pitch clock - or action clock - whatever they call it.