Does baseball need even more technology for plays like Pete Alonso’s disputed fly ball?
Advertisement
Read this article for free:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
To continue reading, please subscribe:
Digital Subscription
One year of digital access for only $205*
- Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
- Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
- Access News Break, our award-winning app
- Play interactive puzzles
*First annual payment billed as $205.00 + GST for one year. This annual subscription will automatically renew at $233.00 + GST every 52 weeks (10% off the regular annual price of $259.35). Offer available to new and qualified returning subscribers only. Cancel any time.
To continue reading, please subscribe:
Add Free Press access to your Brandon Sun subscription for only an additional
$1 for the first 4 weeks*
- Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
- Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
- Access News Break, our award-winning app
- Play interactive puzzles
*Your next Brandon Sun subscription payment will increase by $1.00 and you will be charged $17.95 plus GST for four weeks. After four weeks, your payment will increase to $24.95 plus GST every four weeks.
Read unlimited articles for free today:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
BALTIMORE (AP) — Pete Alonso skipped sideways toward first base while his drive sailed toward the foul pole in left field. Then he tossed the bat aside, seemingly convinced he’d hit a home run.
From that distance and that angle, however, it was hard to be too certain.
Alonso’s deep fly was ruled foul, and the call stood after a review in Baltimore’s 5-3 loss to the New York Yankees on Wednesday night. That led to plenty of outcry — and calls for baseball to use technology to evaluate possible home runs near the foul pole.
It doesn’t sound like that is imminent.
If baseball were to start using additional technology on fly balls like these, it would have to be developed, tested and installed by MLB, according to a person with knowledge of the issue. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.
Unlike with the Automated Ball/Strike system, Hawk-Eye data above the foul pole is unlikely to be accurate that far from the field. It’s based on data from the first part of the ball’s flight, with the rest of the path estimated — meaning factors like wind aren’t fully accounted for.
Before Thursday’s game, Orioles manager Craig Albernaz said the front office had communicated with Major League Baseball about the call.
“Just said that there wasn’t enough video evidence to overturn the call on the field,” Albernaz said.
One angle showed the ball on the right side of the pole and another showed it on the left side. Neither provided much clarity on where the ball was at the moment it passed the pole and the wall in left, which was the key question.
If the ball were lower, the camera angles might’ve shown it passing in front of or behind the pole, but when a hit sails higher than the top of the pole, it’s not easy to find a definitive view.
The difference between a home run and a foul ball is substantial, so it’s understandable players would want to feel confident those calls are correct.
“Obviously, this is a big game in division, so obviously this one’s going to be a little bit more amplified. But this happens quite a few times throughout the season, more than you would think,” Alonso said after the game. “I think having a camera or laser shooting straight up, we have all the technology, analytics and whatever and funds. I don’t see why we can’t do it.”
The ABS system launched in the majors this year, and MLB has been experimenting in the minors with technology allowing challenges to checked swing calls.
___
See AP’s full MLB coverage here