Fuck. There should be comparable punishment for the Red Sox and Yankees and not single out the Astros for harshness.
Good one
Regards,
F Boston.
And NY.
And the league. How shortsighted to think teams wouldnât use the replay room just because they were told not to. There should have been league personnel in there from the get go.
Or at the very least use information obtained during the Astros investigation to open additional investigations against the Red Sox, and maybe the Yankees.
and every other team in the league.
From a purely conceptual standpoint, realtime video makes the perfect tradeoff between discretion and time. A home team could discreetly install a camera in center field: put it in a box, paint it green, and wire it back to the dugout/tunnel/clubhouse/wherever. Itâs less obvious than, say, someone in the bullpen using binoculars, itâs always there (so youâre gathering more information about signs), and itâs almost as fast at gathering the actual information you want to relay. If a visiting team wants to do the same thing, they canât as easily install a camera in CF while also being discreet, they donât have the same luxury of stringing cables everywhere, and relying on wireless technologies has the cost of a higher delay in transmission (i.e. time) and the risk of the wireless signal dropping out.
Relaying that information to the hitter in a fast, accurate, and equally discreet manner is indeed the missing link. But realtime video gives a team more options to solve that problem simply because theyâll have more time to relay the information, and it has the potential to disproportionately benefit the home team. If youâre MLB you want a level playing field, so you forbid teams from using realtime video feeds. I think itâs been said that all teamsâ âliveâ video feeds in the stadium are now on a delay of several seconds, so they now have far less time to relay that information regardless of how they actually do it. But if a home team wants to get an advantage on the down low they may still be capable of some trickery that a visiting team canât pull off. And I believe all of the alleged incidents we know about have involved the home team.
So, when you take the specific teams and specific accusations out of the equation, it makes sense, to me at least. Itâs more about principle than pragmatism, and enterprising teams might just find a way.
According to the below article:
The team sent players to the video replay room â which is usually housed near the dugout â to study signs and relay information back to their teammates, according to three people with the Red Sox during the 2018 season. While this practice wasnât uncommon around the league, MLB cracked down on it prior to the 2018 season, sending out memos strictly forbidding players from using the video replay room to steal signs
This is how the Sox are said to have relayedâŚ
The Red Soxâs method for relaying those signs to hitters wasnât as loud or obvious as the Houston Astrosâ tactic of banging on a trash can. The Red Sox were more subtle when relaying information.
Typically, the player who stole the signs would then walk back to the dugout to inform their teammates. Once runners got on base, they would pass along the signs based on their position on the base, according to The Athletic.
The runner would let the hitter know if he was aware of the sequence. âPut two feet on the bag or look out into center field, and do something thatâs subtle,â as one Red Sox source described it.
The runner stepping off the bag with the right foot first could mean fastball; left foot first, a breaking ball or off-speed pitch.
I love that this article points out Manfredâs bias!
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/boston-red-sox-accused-illegal-152733135.html
This also comes in the wake of Rob Manfred saying, in November, that he did not believe that the sign-stealing scandal then engulfing the Astros extended beyond Houston. That seemed like a silly whitewash at the time, but seems like even more of a whitewash now.
A whitewash that Major League Baseball apparently realizes it can no longer maintain.
To me its an issue of new technology making âcheatingâ easier. MLB needs to do something to counter this if they want to stop it. Maybe something like a buzzer on the pitchers arm/cap controlled by the catcher? Making an example out of one team is not a good way to stop it.
If we wanna blame the league, which I am fine with, then it starts and ends with technology.
Teams are going to do whatever it takes to get a competitive edge. The Commish burying his head in the sand and thinking that his âharsh warningâ would put an end to âcheating,â is asinine.
There is 1 simple way to stop teams using technology to steal signs, the solution is⌠technology. If stealing signs electronically is such a mortal sin, then simple equip the catcher and pitcher with means to communicate electronically that cant be stolen. End of story.
If there is wrong-doing suspicions against Beantown and NYY this may well help soften any blows against Houston. I would think Manfred would not want to open that box.
Here are 2 of the options to curb electronic sign stealing that Iâve seen discussedâŚ
It certainly wonât be perfect since Iâm sure someone could figure out how to hack into the earpieces to listen in, but itâs a start.
MLB realizes this is a problem. In order to curb sign stealing, the league is working to develop technology that would encode pitcher-catcher communication, reported Hannah Keyser of Yahoo Sports. The methods proposed by MLB â including earpieces or a series of lights on the mound â would completely eliminate the need for visible signs, thus making it harder for teams to cheat.
Or possible Houston protest/lawsuit of harsh fine/suspensions? Especially if everyone else was doing the same, which I believe. And if players were involved/started scheme (Beltran), doubt MLB wants to open that can of worms since there are already issues between the union/MLB.
Lights on the mound? One for fastball, two for curve?
I have no clue how lights on the mound would work, without the indicating light being visible to be stolen and then relayed
right. I am sure there are people smarter than me that can figure it out. Voice would be intercepted by the batter IMO. Lights, we could place a camera on the roofâŚha!. I came up with simple vibrating simulation NTTAWWT between pitcher/catcher.
Or even easier, change the signs. Seems like that has already been thought ofâŚ
will there be any teams allowed to play? talk about the tip of the ice berg
The system that makes the most sense to me puts synchronized random number generators on the wrist of the pitcher and catcher, and it spits out a new number, 1-5, every 30 seconds.
So maybe the generator spits out a 2, the catcher drops 5 different signals, and both ends of the battery know that the second signal is the real one. This would preserve as much of the old pitcher/catcher dynamic as possible, minimizes opportunity for eavesdropping, and doesnât require the devices to actually be able to communicate with each other in real time. Shaking off the signs might take an extra beat or two and the pitcher and catcher have to make sure they look for the number at the same time, but seems like it would work.
Or, you know, do what the Nats did and change your signs every 10 pitches. Itâs stupid easy to do.
