[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]
Here’s why it’s time for instant replay in major league baseball. Don’t worry, this is a technology story. Four times within a week recently, what were clearly home runs according to the video were ruled otherwise by umpires. I happened to be watching two of the incidents as they happened. Baseball has long declined to use replay because officials insisted that the human factor of umpiring was part of the game. Even if it meant getting calls wrong, just as players make fielding errors.
Here’s why that’s bunk. Umpires do in fact feel free to look for conventional evidence after the fact. They will consult with other umpires, comparing their differing eyewitness accounts. And they will employ forensic techniques to the ball itself. For example, they examine it for yellow paint that might have transferred to it when it hit a yellow wall over the outfield fence. These attempts to find and use evidence make the non-use of video replay a capricious rejection of technology. Fans shouldn’t feel when they root, root, root for the home team, if they don’t win it’s a shame.
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
—Steve Mirsky
60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast: RSS | iTunes
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber
