9 ms·

One idea I'd like to see spread from competitive gaming is the willingness of the powers that be to adjust the sport to improve it. I don't know the exact detai

by kris-s 8y ago

One idea I'd like to see spread from competitive gaming is the willingness of the powers that be to adjust the sport to improve it. I don't know the exact details of how rules officially get changed in sports, but man does it seem painfully slow for any changes to be made (overpowered pitchers in baseball, no video reviews in soccer, etc). This is something I think MMA does really well, as the rules are mostly in place to prevent permanent injury and the "meta" seems to evolve nicely on its own. (I'd still like to see a version of MMA with no gloves - it would probably be much safer). I don't always agree with changes that come to my particular game of choice (Starcraft II) but I think the steady stream of small adjustments is a boon that other competitive venues should learn from.

philwelch 8y ago
The history of basketball is full of these: repeatedly widening the key because big men were OP, introducing offensive and defensive goaltending rules because big men were OP, outlawing zone defense in the NBA because zone defense was OP, followed by legalizing it because isos were OP. Baseball and soccer are two of the most traditional and conservative sports, so it's not as fair to single them out, even though baseball goes through periods of raising and lowering the pitchers' mound.
- unit91 8y ago
  What does "OP" mean in this context?
  - teraflop 8y ago
    "Overpowered." It's video game slang.
keerthiko 8y ago
I really think as eSports audiences begin to grow comparable to and threaten to overtake traditional sports (I predict 2022), conventional competitive rules are going to start adjusting with the goal of "keeping the game interesting to play and watch", rather than legacy. The younger eyeballs are rapidly being siphoned into eSports and mainstream events will have to start doing something to get their attention.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > younger eyeballs are rapidly being siphoned into eSports and mainstream events will have to start doing something to get their attention What do the data on this look like? Anecdotally, I know lots of sports fans and very few e-sports fans.
  - Larrikin 8y ago
    The esport fans I know have nearly zero overlap with the traditional sports fans. I don't think either is currently worried about losing their audience to the other.
    - alanfalcon 8y ago
      I'm a huge sports fan and League of Legends eSports fan, and I try to watch Overwatch Legaue but just don't think the game itself is fun to watch. I don't think there are lots of people like me, but we do exist! For me, I actually wish esports were more like traditional sports when it comes to game changes, rather than the other way around. There's no chance for truly deep strategies and specializations to develop when the rules are changed every couple months.
      - Klathmon 8y ago
        The problem with esports is that they can't often stay extremely static. They tend to be much more unbalanced than traditional sports. If a "cheese" is found, then the game quickly becomes all about microsecond timing at pulling that strategy off, and no real innovation or change, which at least to me is boring to watch. That being said, there are esports games that don't really "change" all that much or at all. Games like super-smash-bros melee or super Street fighter ii come to mind, where the "rules" have been fairly stable for a while now.
      - leetcrew 8y ago
        keep in mind that esports are still quite young. the top three games right now seem to be csgo, LoL, and dota 2. none of these games have lineages that go back more than twenty years. my guess is that the first twenty years of what became baseball, soccer, etc were even more unstable in their rulesets. i think your take is correct in the long run, but developers have a long road ahead of them before they are creating truly balanced games that can endure decades without change.
Gargoyle 8y ago
I'd personally like for baseball to change even slower than it does. The continuity is a huge part of its appeal to me.
- gbacon 8y ago
  Watching a high school baseball game this weekend, I was thinking of how little the rules of the game seem to change and also how slow performance gains are relative to other sports. Occasionally innovations like the infield fly rule come into play. Small tweaks of inches to the height of the mound seem to be the great majority of changes. Gridiron football grows faster and the style of play changes every year. Baseball is just baseball. These are the subjective impressions of a fan who mostly dropped the game after the ‘95 strike. Perhaps the slow pace of the game shapes my perception.
  - isostatic 8y ago
    As a normal geek, my entire knowledge of baseball comes from DS9 - hence the "infield fly rule" immediately ringing a bell. If the player touches the umpire does that player get kicked out of the field?
    - jkaplowitz 8y ago
      The umpire has lots of discretion. An ejection could well occur if the contact was intentional, but it wouldn't happen if it's an accident while, say, an fielder is chasing a fly ball faster than the umpire can get out of the way.
    - gbacon 8y ago
      Not if that player is Robin Ventura.
  - baddox 8y ago
    Isn’t the infield fly rule essentially patching a bug once it was discovered that it could be exploited? I don’t know much about baseball, but it doesn’t strike me as a rule change that would effect the game negatively in any significant way.
currymj 8y ago
part of the reason may just be that there's only one season a year, and you can't reasonably change the rules in the middle. i assume game devs are perfectly willing to push out balance adjustments more than once a year. likewise there's limited opportunity to playtest -- MLB usually does this during spring training, for things like video reviews, the designated hitter, speed-of-play things, and so on.
- yes_or_gnome 8y ago
  Also. There's the minor leagues. Officially, those are (high to low) AAA, AA, high-A, and low-A. Then there's extended spring training, summer leagues, and associated leagues in the Dominican Republic and Venezuela. Independent leagues, college, high school, and youth leagues down to 4 year olds. International major leagues in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Cuba, and Mexico. There's a lot of room to test out new rule changes, but it would take a lot of effort to get them adopted every where. There are some common rule changes that only make sense in leagues to limit length and discrepancies in competition. Limited innings, run limits per inning, mercy rule, home run limits, starting with runners in extra innings. However, the rules that the MLB are looking into wouldn't make any sense in non-professional leagues. MLB is looking at limiting visits to the mound and pitching clocks. Your local high school game isn't going to have pitcher-induced piece of play problems because the player's just aren't that good. Or, if they are, then the game will be forfeited early. I can't imagine MLB fans being okay with rules that stifle competition. Starting an inning with runners on feels 'icky' for lack of a better term. I remember when the NHL introduced shootouts. As an NHL fan, I was upset, but I understand the reasoning behind it. There's a large constituency that doesn't like games that end in a tie. Penalty shots are exciting, even when they're manufactured. And, it's a common rule in other hockey leagues (and football/soccer). So, not a big change, but disappointing to a lot of fans; myself included. However, the change from 4-on-4 to 3-on-3. That was excellent, imo. Just thinking about the number of rule changes in the NHL, since 2005, is pretty amazing. Certainly it is more exciting, but to get back to baseball, it has me thinking of all the room there is to adjust the game of hockey. Eliminate two line pass, adjust equipment size and materials, regulate goalies, regulate defense, regulate fighting, instant icing, concussion testing, etc., etc., etc. I couldn't even come up with did ways to make baseball "more exciting". And, even if someone did, then I feel that it would be detrimental to the game. Just for fun. 1. The first batter runner dictates which base is "first" by running left (to "third") or right (to "first"). This would make indeed infield defense more difficult and add an extra degree of thought into the game. 2. Fielders must rotate positions each inning. Now you can't just put the lefty, 250lbs guy at first because he'll have to shag some balls in the outfield and be a nightmare at shortstop. 3. Rescind the "ball in cap", which is a ground rule triple if a fielder catches a ball with his hat. Instead, make it an ground rule double-play. Just for the fun of seeing someone try it and, as a result, for all the dropped balls. 4. Any player that hits a home run may go back up to bat. Why, yes, i would love to see a single player go back-back-back HRs before taking himself out of the game due to exhaustion. 5. The starting pitcher may opt to throw a red/hot ball once per game. If he throws a strike, then it's a strikeout. If it's a ball, a walk. If it's hit, then it can't be caught (else it's a ground rule double). Hit by pitch is a HR. A batted HR is a grandslam. A foul becomes a do over. 6. The opposing team sets your lineup. Starting pitchers must have a minimum days rest. And, the lineup cannot be changed in the first inning except for injury.
learnstats2 8y ago
It depends what you mean by 'improve'. Preventing permanent injury is in everyone's interest and the synchronised interest can mean it happens quickly, yes. On the other hand, video reviews in soccer create a bit of controversy and a human element that people enjoy. FIFA's 2005 comment on this: "It's part of football" is undeniable.
- jghn 8y ago
  I've never understood the desire for a human element in officiating. It's not like people sat around hundreds of years ago and said, "You know what would really make this game fun to watch? Completely flawed referees/umpires/officials!"
  - curiousGambler 8y ago
    Yeah it's definitely odd, and rationally makes zero sense as you've pointed out, but feelings are weird, especially feelings of nostalgia and tradition.
  - mattm 8y ago
    The main thing is the amount of time it takes to get a call right. If there is technology available to make certain calls immediately, then I'm all for it. Unfortunately with video review, it can take several minutes to look over which completely disrupts the pace of the game and any momentum one team may have had.
    - jghn 8y ago
      Yeah, that I definitely get. It's the people who legitimately believe that blown calls now and then are a benefit to the game.
    - racer-v 8y ago
      Yes, and specifically in the case of Premier League it seemed to cause problems with needing extra stoppage time. There was a recent match experimenting with video replay, and one side's manager complained that more extra minutes should have been added because of the video review, but wasn't (presumably because of TV advertising scheduled).
hervature 8y ago
I agree with most of what you say. But why do you think no gloves would be safer in MMA? Without gloves, you would have guys breaking their knuckles on people’s skulls. It would be like how Anderson Silva broke his leg.
- i_cant_speel 8y ago
  You just answered your own question. People would be more likely to to break their knuckles on people's skills which means there will be less hits to people's skulls to cause concussions.
  - wdewind 8y ago
    I'm very into combat sports and I've seen this argument a lot. It makes no sense to me. Watch some bareknuckle boxing, people are not holding back and just break their hands all the time and knockouts happen much earlier. The newest science on CTE makes it seem like accumulated small damage might actually be worse than periodic large damage, so the only argument in favor of bare knuckle boxing is that you get knocked out so quickly that you don't get a chance to accumulate damage. 8oz gloves seems to be a very reasonable middle ground to me.
    - kris-s 8y ago
      >The newest science on CTE makes it seem like accumulated small damage might actually be worse than periodic large damage That's the idea of gloveless, you can't just trade blows all day. It probably would make boxing safer (where safer means choosing hand damage over brain damage). In MMA I believe it would reduce boxing and increase the prevalence of grappling and muay thai. Ultimately the goal I'd like to aim for is less chronic head injuries, I think gloveless would do that, but who knows. On the topic of ditching "safety gear" I'm curious what CTE rates are comparing American Football to Rugby or Australian Football.
    - burger_moon 8y ago
      It's mostly an idea that is repeated ad infinitum by Joe Rogan and because of his large audience people have begun repeating it as if it made sense. Just like playing on a basketball court, it's not a good idea.
Trundle 8y ago
I used to enjoy the changing meta, new heroes, balance patches back when I played dota a lot. Now that I haven't played in years I don't enjoy watching any more because it's too far removed from the game it was when I played. I can't tune in to an important final and follow along at anything other than the most superficial of levels. If the meta was static then id be a casual follower, as it is I'm not any sort of follower. Professional sports seem to have very large casual fan bases. If you kept changing the rules then maybe they'd be fine with that, or maybe they'd be like me and stop watching.
- kris-s 8y ago
  Yeah there is a balance to be struck, you don't want baseball evolving into hockey over the course of a decade. I'm not suggesting we go the Calvinball route.
- bigger_cheese 8y ago
  I'm with you on this. I feel exactly the same way. I played Dota casually for years (i.e once every couple of months I jump into a pub game with my friends and have some fun) but I used to enjoy watching high level tournaments. In my opinion they ruined the game by iterating through changes way to quickly. It feels like to me every successive patch in last 2 or 3 years there has been huge sweeping changes. The Dota I see now is not the game I fell in love with all those years ago. Almost everything has changed. Sometimes you need to realize when you have a good thing and leave it alone...
  - plantain 8y ago
    On the other hand, if you are a casual but regular follower the constant changes can make it more exciting - every other month it felt like "Holy shit! They changed X! This changes everything!", and my day would be full of in depth discussions on the implications with my friends.
ubernostrum 8y ago
The thing is, most of the changes MLB (well, basically Rob Manfred) has proposed lately don't really "improve" anything. The last good change was introducing the ability to challenge a call and get it reviewed. Since then we've seen the slide and collision rules, which mostly nobody -- even, at times, the umpires -- seems to understand well enough to apply. And the new pitch-less intentional walk, which was just pointless as a time-saver. And this year the mound-visit count, which is pointless again. And now proposals like starting extra innings with a runner in scoring position, because apparently the drama of a tied game with potential sudden-death situations isn't interesting and we just need to make sure it ends as quickly as possible, or ideas for how to make defensive shifts illegal so hitters never have to adjust to how the defense is playing. Baseball is always going to be a more slow-paced game than the other major sports. That's inherent in the game. The solution should be to find ways to embrace that and showcase the interesting things that lead to it having the pace it does. And really the biggest focus ought to be on solving the ridiculous maze of restrictions on watching major-league baseball without a cable TV subscription, since the game needs to maintain a base of younger fans and those fans increasingly are not going to have traditional TV subscriptions. Baseball is currently literally in the business of telling people "it's nice that you want to pay hundreds of dollars to watch our sport, but we're not in the business of letting you do that". This recent article gave a good overview of how that happened despite MLB having probably the best streaming and online service of any major US sport: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/major-league-baseball-blackout-rules-alienate-fans/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/major-league-baseball...
- oplav 8y ago
  Rob Manfred has been pretty open about one of his goals being pace of play and speeding up games. Pitch-less intentional walks and limiting mound visits both help achieve that goal. > proposals like starting extra innings with a runner in scoring position Manfred has said this is a rule that will not make its way into the majors [0]. The objective is to lower pitch counts for developing pitchers in the minor leagues. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxMK_Wwgvl8&feature=youtu.be&t=555 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxMK_Wwgvl8&feature=youtu.be...
  - 8y ago
stordoff 8y ago
> no video reviews in soccer It's interesting to compare that to cricket. Umpires can direct decisions to the "third umpire", and teams have a limited number of reviews (which they can ask the third umpire to review the decision), and the third umpire has access to replays (including slow-motion), Snickometer (microphones detecting the sound of the ball hitting the bat/player), Hot-Spot (thermal imaging cameras showing where the ball struck), and Hawk-eye (ball trajectory tracking). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpire_Decision_Review_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpire_Decision_Review_System
- SuperGent 8y ago
  So why are they not using this tech for balls/strikes? The point of this article is that during extra innings, umps are miscalling pitches. With Hawk-eye the home base ump could know near-instantly if the ball is in the zone. Then there is just the arguments of the batter swinging..
na85 8y ago
As far as soccer goes, fifa resists video playback so that the quality of available officiating tools are the same in first and third world countries. In other words, rich countries don't deserve better officiating enabled by video replay just because they're rich.
- myroon5 8y ago
  Never heard this reasoning before. Do you have a source?
  - techer 8y ago
    IMHO FIFA isn't the best place to look for clarity. The theory used to be that it needed to be universally/easily applicable. And (maybe) not interrupt the flow of the game. They allowed goal line technology as it was instant and poor decisions in huge matches became embarrassing. Rugby and cricket both use it very well at high levels. There is plenty of material out there from the past few decades. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/jan/24/video-replay-technology-sepp-blatter https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/jan/24/video-repla... edit: I know I didn't address your issue, I'm trying to find this argument but Google has become quite useless. edit: “protect the simplicity and universality of the game” https://www.theguardian.com/football/when-saturday-comes-blog/2014/oct/30/technology-change-football-futurology-next-50-years https://www.theguardian.com/football/when-saturday-comes-blo...
brynx97 8y ago
> no video reviews in soccer VAR (video assistant referee) will be used at World Cup 2018 in Russia. It's already being used in Germany and MLS (US). Most leagues are planning to implement it within the next few years. It's been very clumsy at first, but over the last few years, there have been so so many high profile stupid mistakes by refs. The success of the goal line tech just made VAR a natural evolution IMO.
- nyc111 8y ago
  I think it is a big mistake to introduce Video evaluation into footbal. Main reason is that you would just be taking away the authority of the referee and giving it to a machine and to other referees who will be evaluating the video. The mistake is to think that there is an absolute truth and we can arrive at this truth by introducing observational tools with more resolution. This is not true. As the resolution increases it becomes more difficult to make a decision. There is also the point of view of the referee. The referee cannot see everything. And this is the beauty of the game. Referees make mistakes but if all referees call everything as they see it this will average out for each team during the entire season. But referees are human too. And they have to control the game and control footballers with big egos. Also footballers are very sophisticated con artists and they continually try to fool the referee. All these are part of the game. Football is the game of mistakes. It's a huge mistake to try to get rid of mistakes by introducing technology into the game.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
nothrabannosir 8y ago
> no video reviews in soccer Call me cynical, but I am convinced this is because the brass of soccer are corrupt to the core, and this threatens their business model. They are going at it as slow as humanly possible. Sepp Blatter, and the Qatar vote, have forever ruined what little trust I had in association football.
snarfy 8y ago
The constant changes to Starcraft II are why I don't play it anymore. I can see them changing it with each install, but after LotV they really needed to leave it be. Sure, change the rules once in a while, but not every other patch.
cup-of-tea 8y ago
This happens in Formula 1 almost every year but people always complain about the changes. Some people want the rules to stay the same, some people want the best version of the sport. I can see both sides of the argument. Can't please everyone.

by kris-s 8y ago

philwelch 8y ago

The history of basketball is full of these: repeatedly widening the key because big men were OP, introducing offensive and defensive goaltending rules because big men were OP, outlawing zone defense in the NBA because zone defense was OP, followed by legalizing it because isos were OP. Baseball and soccer are two of the most traditional and conservative sports, so it's not as fair to single them out, even though baseball goes through periods of raising and lowering the pitchers' mound.

unit91 8y ago
What does "OP" mean in this context?
- teraflop 8y ago
  "Overpowered." It's video game slang.

keerthiko 8y ago

I really think as eSports audiences begin to grow comparable to and threaten to overtake traditional sports (I predict 2022), conventional competitive rules are going to start adjusting with the goal of "keeping the game interesting to play and watch", rather than legacy. The younger eyeballs are rapidly being siphoned into eSports and mainstream events will have to start doing something to get their attention.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> younger eyeballs are rapidly being siphoned into eSports and mainstream events will have to start doing something to get their attention What do the data on this look like? Anecdotally, I know lots of sports fans and very few e-sports fans.
- Larrikin 8y ago
  The esport fans I know have nearly zero overlap with the traditional sports fans. I don't think either is currently worried about losing their audience to the other.
  - alanfalcon 8y ago
    I'm a huge sports fan and League of Legends eSports fan, and I try to watch Overwatch Legaue but just don't think the game itself is fun to watch. I don't think there are lots of people like me, but we do exist! For me, I actually wish esports were more like traditional sports when it comes to game changes, rather than the other way around. There's no chance for truly deep strategies and specializations to develop when the rules are changed every couple months.
    - Klathmon 8y ago
      The problem with esports is that they can't often stay extremely static. They tend to be much more unbalanced than traditional sports. If a "cheese" is found, then the game quickly becomes all about microsecond timing at pulling that strategy off, and no real innovation or change, which at least to me is boring to watch. That being said, there are esports games that don't really "change" all that much or at all. Games like super-smash-bros melee or super Street fighter ii come to mind, where the "rules" have been fairly stable for a while now.
    - leetcrew 8y ago
      keep in mind that esports are still quite young. the top three games right now seem to be csgo, LoL, and dota 2. none of these games have lineages that go back more than twenty years. my guess is that the first twenty years of what became baseball, soccer, etc were even more unstable in their rulesets. i think your take is correct in the long run, but developers have a long road ahead of them before they are creating truly balanced games that can endure decades without change.

Gargoyle 8y ago

I'd personally like for baseball to change even slower than it does. The continuity is a huge part of its appeal to me.

gbacon 8y ago
Watching a high school baseball game this weekend, I was thinking of how little the rules of the game seem to change and also how slow performance gains are relative to other sports. Occasionally innovations like the infield fly rule come into play. Small tweaks of inches to the height of the mound seem to be the great majority of changes. Gridiron football grows faster and the style of play changes every year. Baseball is just baseball. These are the subjective impressions of a fan who mostly dropped the game after the ‘95 strike. Perhaps the slow pace of the game shapes my perception.
- isostatic 8y ago
  As a normal geek, my entire knowledge of baseball comes from DS9 - hence the "infield fly rule" immediately ringing a bell. If the player touches the umpire does that player get kicked out of the field?
  - jkaplowitz 8y ago
    The umpire has lots of discretion. An ejection could well occur if the contact was intentional, but it wouldn't happen if it's an accident while, say, an fielder is chasing a fly ball faster than the umpire can get out of the way.
  - gbacon 8y ago
    Not if that player is Robin Ventura.
- baddox 8y ago
  Isn’t the infield fly rule essentially patching a bug once it was discovered that it could be exploited? I don’t know much about baseball, but it doesn’t strike me as a rule change that would effect the game negatively in any significant way.

currymj 8y ago

part of the reason may just be that there's only one season a year, and you can't reasonably change the rules in the middle. i assume game devs are perfectly willing to push out balance adjustments more than once a year. likewise there's limited opportunity to playtest -- MLB usually does this during spring training, for things like video reviews, the designated hitter, speed-of-play things, and so on.

yes_or_gnome 8y ago
Also. There's the minor leagues. Officially, those are (high to low) AAA, AA, high-A, and low-A. Then there's extended spring training, summer leagues, and associated leagues in the Dominican Republic and Venezuela. Independent leagues, college, high school, and youth leagues down to 4 year olds. International major leagues in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Cuba, and Mexico. There's a lot of room to test out new rule changes, but it would take a lot of effort to get them adopted every where. There are some common rule changes that only make sense in leagues to limit length and discrepancies in competition. Limited innings, run limits per inning, mercy rule, home run limits, starting with runners in extra innings. However, the rules that the MLB are looking into wouldn't make any sense in non-professional leagues. MLB is looking at limiting visits to the mound and pitching clocks. Your local high school game isn't going to have pitcher-induced piece of play problems because the player's just aren't that good. Or, if they are, then the game will be forfeited early. I can't imagine MLB fans being okay with rules that stifle competition. Starting an inning with runners on feels 'icky' for lack of a better term. I remember when the NHL introduced shootouts. As an NHL fan, I was upset, but I understand the reasoning behind it. There's a large constituency that doesn't like games that end in a tie. Penalty shots are exciting, even when they're manufactured. And, it's a common rule in other hockey leagues (and football/soccer). So, not a big change, but disappointing to a lot of fans; myself included. However, the change from 4-on-4 to 3-on-3. That was excellent, imo. Just thinking about the number of rule changes in the NHL, since 2005, is pretty amazing. Certainly it is more exciting, but to get back to baseball, it has me thinking of all the room there is to adjust the game of hockey. Eliminate two line pass, adjust equipment size and materials, regulate goalies, regulate defense, regulate fighting, instant icing, concussion testing, etc., etc., etc. I couldn't even come up with did ways to make baseball "more exciting". And, even if someone did, then I feel that it would be detrimental to the game. Just for fun. 1. The first batter runner dictates which base is "first" by running left (to "third") or right (to "first"). This would make indeed infield defense more difficult and add an extra degree of thought into the game. 2. Fielders must rotate positions each inning. Now you can't just put the lefty, 250lbs guy at first because he'll have to shag some balls in the outfield and be a nightmare at shortstop. 3. Rescind the "ball in cap", which is a ground rule triple if a fielder catches a ball with his hat. Instead, make it an ground rule double-play. Just for the fun of seeing someone try it and, as a result, for all the dropped balls. 4. Any player that hits a home run may go back up to bat. Why, yes, i would love to see a single player go back-back-back HRs before taking himself out of the game due to exhaustion. 5. The starting pitcher may opt to throw a red/hot ball once per game. If he throws a strike, then it's a strikeout. If it's a ball, a walk. If it's hit, then it can't be caught (else it's a ground rule double). Hit by pitch is a HR. A batted HR is a grandslam. A foul becomes a do over. 6. The opposing team sets your lineup. Starting pitchers must have a minimum days rest. And, the lineup cannot be changed in the first inning except for injury.

learnstats2 8y ago

It depends what you mean by 'improve'. Preventing permanent injury is in everyone's interest and the synchronised interest can mean it happens quickly, yes. On the other hand, video reviews in soccer create a bit of controversy and a human element that people enjoy. FIFA's 2005 comment on this: "It's part of football" is undeniable.

jghn 8y ago
I've never understood the desire for a human element in officiating. It's not like people sat around hundreds of years ago and said, "You know what would really make this game fun to watch? Completely flawed referees/umpires/officials!"
- curiousGambler 8y ago
  Yeah it's definitely odd, and rationally makes zero sense as you've pointed out, but feelings are weird, especially feelings of nostalgia and tradition.
- mattm 8y ago
  The main thing is the amount of time it takes to get a call right. If there is technology available to make certain calls immediately, then I'm all for it. Unfortunately with video review, it can take several minutes to look over which completely disrupts the pace of the game and any momentum one team may have had.
  - jghn 8y ago
    Yeah, that I definitely get. It's the people who legitimately believe that blown calls now and then are a benefit to the game.
  - racer-v 8y ago
    Yes, and specifically in the case of Premier League it seemed to cause problems with needing extra stoppage time. There was a recent match experimenting with video replay, and one side's manager complained that more extra minutes should have been added because of the video review, but wasn't (presumably because of TV advertising scheduled).

hervature 8y ago

I agree with most of what you say. But why do you think no gloves would be safer in MMA? Without gloves, you would have guys breaking their knuckles on people’s skulls. It would be like how Anderson Silva broke his leg.

i_cant_speel 8y ago
You just answered your own question. People would be more likely to to break their knuckles on people's skills which means there will be less hits to people's skulls to cause concussions.
- wdewind 8y ago
  I'm very into combat sports and I've seen this argument a lot. It makes no sense to me. Watch some bareknuckle boxing, people are not holding back and just break their hands all the time and knockouts happen much earlier. The newest science on CTE makes it seem like accumulated small damage might actually be worse than periodic large damage, so the only argument in favor of bare knuckle boxing is that you get knocked out so quickly that you don't get a chance to accumulate damage. 8oz gloves seems to be a very reasonable middle ground to me.
  - kris-s 8y ago
    >The newest science on CTE makes it seem like accumulated small damage might actually be worse than periodic large damage That's the idea of gloveless, you can't just trade blows all day. It probably would make boxing safer (where safer means choosing hand damage over brain damage). In MMA I believe it would reduce boxing and increase the prevalence of grappling and muay thai. Ultimately the goal I'd like to aim for is less chronic head injuries, I think gloveless would do that, but who knows. On the topic of ditching "safety gear" I'm curious what CTE rates are comparing American Football to Rugby or Australian Football.
  - burger_moon 8y ago
    It's mostly an idea that is repeated ad infinitum by Joe Rogan and because of his large audience people have begun repeating it as if it made sense. Just like playing on a basketball court, it's not a good idea.

Trundle 8y ago

I used to enjoy the changing meta, new heroes, balance patches back when I played dota a lot. Now that I haven't played in years I don't enjoy watching any more because it's too far removed from the game it was when I played. I can't tune in to an important final and follow along at anything other than the most superficial of levels. If the meta was static then id be a casual follower, as it is I'm not any sort of follower. Professional sports seem to have very large casual fan bases. If you kept changing the rules then maybe they'd be fine with that, or maybe they'd be like me and stop watching.

kris-s 8y ago
Yeah there is a balance to be struck, you don't want baseball evolving into hockey over the course of a decade. I'm not suggesting we go the Calvinball route.
bigger_cheese 8y ago
I'm with you on this. I feel exactly the same way. I played Dota casually for years (i.e once every couple of months I jump into a pub game with my friends and have some fun) but I used to enjoy watching high level tournaments. In my opinion they ruined the game by iterating through changes way to quickly. It feels like to me every successive patch in last 2 or 3 years there has been huge sweeping changes. The Dota I see now is not the game I fell in love with all those years ago. Almost everything has changed. Sometimes you need to realize when you have a good thing and leave it alone...
- plantain 8y ago
  On the other hand, if you are a casual but regular follower the constant changes can make it more exciting - every other month it felt like "Holy shit! They changed X! This changes everything!", and my day would be full of in depth discussions on the implications with my friends.

ubernostrum 8y ago

The thing is, most of the changes MLB (well, basically Rob Manfred) has proposed lately don't really "improve" anything. The last good change was introducing the ability to challenge a call and get it reviewed. Since then we've seen the slide and collision rules, which mostly nobody -- even, at times, the umpires -- seems to understand well enough to apply. And the new pitch-less intentional walk, which was just pointless as a time-saver. And this year the mound-visit count, which is pointless again. And now proposals like starting extra innings with a runner in scoring position, because apparently the drama of a tied game with potential sudden-death situations isn't interesting and we just need to make sure it ends as quickly as possible, or ideas for how to make defensive shifts illegal so hitters never have to adjust to how the defense is playing. Baseball is always going to be a more slow-paced game than the other major sports. That's inherent in the game. The solution should be to find ways to embrace that and showcase the interesting things that lead to it having the pace it does. And really the biggest focus ought to be on solving the ridiculous maze of restrictions on watching major-league baseball without a cable TV subscription, since the game needs to maintain a base of younger fans and those fans increasingly are not going to have traditional TV subscriptions. Baseball is currently literally in the business of telling people "it's nice that you want to pay hundreds of dollars to watch our sport, but we're not in the business of letting you do that". This recent article gave a good overview of how that happened despite MLB having probably the best streaming and online service of any major US sport: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/major-league-baseball-blackout-rules-alienate-fans/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/major-league-baseball...

oplav 8y ago
Rob Manfred has been pretty open about one of his goals being pace of play and speeding up games. Pitch-less intentional walks and limiting mound visits both help achieve that goal. > proposals like starting extra innings with a runner in scoring position Manfred has said this is a rule that will not make its way into the majors [0]. The objective is to lower pitch counts for developing pitchers in the minor leagues. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxMK_Wwgvl8&feature=youtu.be&t=555 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxMK_Wwgvl8&feature=youtu.be...
- 8y ago

stordoff 8y ago

> no video reviews in soccer It's interesting to compare that to cricket. Umpires can direct decisions to the "third umpire", and teams have a limited number of reviews (which they can ask the third umpire to review the decision), and the third umpire has access to replays (including slow-motion), Snickometer (microphones detecting the sound of the ball hitting the bat/player), Hot-Spot (thermal imaging cameras showing where the ball struck), and Hawk-eye (ball trajectory tracking). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpire_Decision_Review_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpire_Decision_Review_System

SuperGent 8y ago
So why are they not using this tech for balls/strikes? The point of this article is that during extra innings, umps are miscalling pitches. With Hawk-eye the home base ump could know near-instantly if the ball is in the zone. Then there is just the arguments of the batter swinging..

na85 8y ago

As far as soccer goes, fifa resists video playback so that the quality of available officiating tools are the same in first and third world countries. In other words, rich countries don't deserve better officiating enabled by video replay just because they're rich.

myroon5 8y ago
Never heard this reasoning before. Do you have a source?
- techer 8y ago
  IMHO FIFA isn't the best place to look for clarity. The theory used to be that it needed to be universally/easily applicable. And (maybe) not interrupt the flow of the game. They allowed goal line technology as it was instant and poor decisions in huge matches became embarrassing. Rugby and cricket both use it very well at high levels. There is plenty of material out there from the past few decades. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/jan/24/video-replay-technology-sepp-blatter https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/jan/24/video-repla... edit: I know I didn't address your issue, I'm trying to find this argument but Google has become quite useless. edit: “protect the simplicity and universality of the game” https://www.theguardian.com/football/when-saturday-comes-blog/2014/oct/30/technology-change-football-futurology-next-50-years https://www.theguardian.com/football/when-saturday-comes-blo...

brynx97 8y ago

> no video reviews in soccer VAR (video assistant referee) will be used at World Cup 2018 in Russia. It's already being used in Germany and MLS (US). Most leagues are planning to implement it within the next few years. It's been very clumsy at first, but over the last few years, there have been so so many high profile stupid mistakes by refs. The success of the goal line tech just made VAR a natural evolution IMO.

nyc111 8y ago
I think it is a big mistake to introduce Video evaluation into footbal. Main reason is that you would just be taking away the authority of the referee and giving it to a machine and to other referees who will be evaluating the video. The mistake is to think that there is an absolute truth and we can arrive at this truth by introducing observational tools with more resolution. This is not true. As the resolution increases it becomes more difficult to make a decision. There is also the point of view of the referee. The referee cannot see everything. And this is the beauty of the game. Referees make mistakes but if all referees call everything as they see it this will average out for each team during the entire season. But referees are human too. And they have to control the game and control footballers with big egos. Also footballers are very sophisticated con artists and they continually try to fool the referee. All these are part of the game. Football is the game of mistakes. It's a huge mistake to try to get rid of mistakes by introducing technology into the game.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

nothrabannosir 8y ago

> no video reviews in soccer Call me cynical, but I am convinced this is because the brass of soccer are corrupt to the core, and this threatens their business model. They are going at it as slow as humanly possible. Sepp Blatter, and the Qatar vote, have forever ruined what little trust I had in association football.

snarfy 8y ago

The constant changes to Starcraft II are why I don't play it anymore. I can see them changing it with each install, but after LotV they really needed to leave it be. Sure, change the rules once in a while, but not every other patch.

cup-of-tea 8y ago

This happens in Formula 1 almost every year but people always complain about the changes. Some people want the rules to stay the same, some people want the best version of the sport. I can see both sides of the argument. Can't please everyone.