In other words, the Astros were surveilling the Red Sox to make sure that the Red Sox weren’t surveilling the Astros. https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-astros-were-caught-doing-something/
What's funny about this... it's the exact same defense Chris Correa used for hacking into the Astros' system. But I think it's likely legit, and here's why: I'm at a loss what filming a team's dugout would yield, in terms of a competitive advantage. They don't speak in sign language, so unless you're close enough to get audio - nearly impossible in stadium full of 40,000 - what intel are they potentially revealing? Any sign they send to a pitcher or fielder or catcher they'd do in plain sight so the pitcher or fielder or catcher could see. Now, if he was positioned in CF and shooting the catcher... that's sketchy. But next to the dugout? What am I missing?...
Of course the Astros try to steal signs. Any team worth a damn tries to steal signs. When I worked for the Astros years ago, it was well known that all teams tried to steal signs or try to see if a pitcher was tipping his pitches.
There are; but I would think the best vantage point to film those signs isn't to the left of the dugout, but rather next to your own dugout looking straight in. That would also, potentially, be far less obvious as you could merely pass them off as a fan.
Without excerpting too much of the article, I couldn't help but chuckle at this partial quote cited within it: "This is not the first investigation into the Astros’ attempts to gain competitive advantages this season, three sources told Yahoo Sports. During a late-August game against Oakland, A’s players noticed Astros players clapping in the dugout before pitches and believed they were relaying stolen signs to pitchers in the batter’s box, sources said. The A’s called the league, which said it would investigate the matter." I mean, that's just smart. I wholly endorse any team doing it. Sorry you could't think it of it, Oakland. Way to complain to the teacher that the Astros got a higher grade than you so they MUST have cheated.
Do I believe the Astros, no. Common sense. They could have told the league. This has sketch written all over it.
Verlander proposes wireless communication b/t the pitcher and catcher (I guess you could add 1 guy in the dugout also), would eliminate this b.s. and shorten the games.
I dont think the level of difficulty is the right question. If it can occur, it will. I guess we could have a ballboy run a message from the pitcher to the catcher every pitch
I expect the status quo to continue, at least for a few more years whether it is better or worse than the alternatives. I suppose if the communication between the pitcher and catcher were encrypted, it probably would be safe enough. But lets consider other factors: 1) Sometimes, the stadium is so loud, would there be problems hearing the signs over a earpiece? 2) Technology breaks down, no matter how well implemented on occasion. When that occurs during game, then what? Especially a legitimate concern when in years to come after wireless implementation and signs have gone out of fashion and therefore clubs are no longer trained in such. 3) How are pitchers going to feel about wearing a head piece? Catchers? I think its premature to assume the current system (signs) is worse.
1) If there are problems, can always use signs. NFL stadiums are usually louder and they usually work for them. 2) Breaks down. Go back to signs. Teams will be aware that they have to have signs just like NFL teams are prepared for headphones not working. 3) If they don't want to use technology, they don't have to use it. Once in every 100 games or more, teams would have to resort to status quo. On the plus side, other team wont be able to study signs ahead of time such that it will take longer to break. If person, team doesn't want to use technology, that is fine. They can enjoy vacations in October.
If the NFL, where playcalls and strategy is far more dynamic and complex than baseball, can master wireless communication (and has been doing it for decades), baseball can certainly figure something out.
They probably can. The question is, will they? Like umps calling the strike zone, there are certain things that to many are inherently part of baseball. Likewise for catcher signs. While I think the game would be more accurate and less prone to cheating, some would seem it as an end of an era. Perhaps an end to the version of baseball they have come to love. It would be odd to see the pitcher on the mound with a headset and no ump calling the strikes. Better? Not sure here.
They've already implemented a clock on mound visits, limiting mound visits, and now pitch sign stealing drawing all sorts of attention in the World Series with Machado, and more delays/meetings needed to discuss new signs. If you don't believe change is possible, you're not paying attention.... and its very likely they're going to see pitch clocks and even more restrictions on mound visits as the game times continue to be too long. Also, the version of the game that everybody "grew up with" and grew to love, didn't feature constant pitching changes, mound visits for almost every batter, constant paranoia, and potential manipulation of advanced technology.... all sports evolve.
You are right that there would be push back from the traditionalists, but baseball desperately needs to streamline it's sport somehow. There is preposterous amount of standing around, and pointless foul balls. They can't do anything about foul balls, but the standing, staring, shaking, and stepping out (rinse, repeat) can be addressed. This excessive length between pitches isn't traditional, it is a modern corruption of the game that needs to be corrected. It gets unbearable at times in the postseason. A 9 inning game should rarely take 3 hours, and they are often closer to 4. All the other crap they are doing is just window dressing. The time between pitches is far and away the biggest culprit.
Ratings are down big-time for this WS. Partly because both teams likely don't draw interest unless you're actually a fan of those teams (no underdog story, no team trying to win their first title story). The only way to get casual baseball fans, or fans of other teams interested is to get rid of the downtime between pitches. I can see Manfred using the ratings as an indictment to go ahead and inact his long-standing goal of a pitch clock and to enforce the batters box rules.
