Technology Changes which have enhanced/deterred sports

[madguy30]

If you consider fishing a sport, the live scope technology has kind of changed fishing. Being able to use front facing sonar to locate and spin around the boat/ice hole and find fish 100ft away from you is a game changer. Even just seeing so many boats out on Big Creek using it to locate the pan fish is kinda nuts considering the cost of the units. Not sure if it's good or bad for the sport yet but finding fish has never been easier if you can afford it.

The fish still have to bite but when crowds of people find and hover around where the fish are schooled up it sure seems less challenging.

The internet and phones imo have been negative effect in basically spoiling little known areas. Word of mouth always had a role in that but the technology has fast forwarded the process.

 

[SouthJerseyCy]

Not really it just slows down the whole process, the ball is going to move some in your hands, that does not mean that you did not catch and posse it. They now have rules that they have to posse it all the way to the ground, even though their feet are in. Once the catch is made and feet are down, anything after that is unimportant.
If not then change the rule that the ball carrier must posse the ball until he is legally down and is then attempting to get back up.

I'll agree with that in football. See my subsequent post #33

 

[zarnold56]

The fish still have to bite but when crowds of people find and hover around where the fish are schooled up it sure seems less challenging.

The internet and phones imo have been negative effect in basically spoiling little known areas. Word of mouth always had a role in that but the technology has fast forwarded the process.

Yes, but it's a lot easier to trigger a bite when you can get a live look at how the fish are responding to a bait/presentation. I believe the Muskie pro fishing series banned forward facing sonar during tournaments but anglers can still use it during practice. It's a very interesting topic, and will most likely take 5+ years to see the full effect on fisheries of the widespread adoption of it.

 

[madguy30]

Yes, but it's a lot easier to trigger a bite when you can get a live look at how the fish are responding to a bait/presentation. I believe the Muskie pro fishing series banned forward facing sonar during tournaments but anglers can still use it during practice. It's a very interesting topic, and will most likely take 5+ years to see the full effect on fisheries of the widespread adoption of it.

Yep like ice fishing cameras. You can literally see up close what they're doing.

I'll never do it personally. I just scoot around the edges/shores and the fish are there or they aren't.

 

[zarnold56]

Yep like ice fishing cameras. You can literally see up close what they're doing.

I'll never do it personally. I just scoot around the edges/shores and the fish are there or they aren't.

If I went ice fishing more than maybe once a year I would invest in it. Total game changer for ice fishing. You still might drill 50+ holes in a day but would have a better idea of where to target.

 

[houjix]

The problem with getting rid of inconclusive evidence to overturn is many times video doesn't have the view that the official who initially made the call had on the field. Video might not have the view that made the right call but one of the zebras on the field may have had it.

Proposed solution: Body cams on the officials.

 

[cyclones500]

There's a fantastic program (~83 min runtime though) put out by the NFL about broadcast tech evolution over the decades. Goes behind-the-scenes with items like the score bug, yellow line, skycam, pylon cams, etc.

(Won't embed, but the full vid is on YouTube.)

Watched some of that. I like the timeline structure.

It also reminded me of another taken-for-granted element: The on-screen score/time display.

If you watch a full-game replay prior to mid-'90s, you almost feel lost when you realize that isn't available all the time. "How much time is remaining? How many yards for first down?" "When are they gonna show the score?!" And so on.

By extension, the score ticker. I remember when scores of other games were shown like once per quarter.

 

[cyclones500]

Proposed solution: Body cams on the officials.

That has potential. But then, would booth need to review it to confirm an official had a good angle?

 

[theshadow]

By extension, the score ticker. I remember when scores of other games were shown like once per quarter.

Watching ESPN in the late 80s to mid 90s, and their "ticker" was twice per hour ( :28 and :58), and if you missed that you were SOL for another 30 minutes.

 

[madguy30]

If I went ice fishing more than maybe once a year I would invest in it. Total game changer for ice fishing. You still might drill 50+ holes in a day but would have a better idea of where to target.

Yeah I don't go often but if I did I still don't care enough to find fish.

Carve a hole near some brush or weeds and see how it goes. I'm the same with paddling.

 

[drlove]

Full body suits for men, where I think that quote comes from, were removed for use in 2009. Yes, the body suite created so much buoyancy that resistance was heavily minimized.

interesting that there is an ISU tie to this topic. Professor Sharp was a fixture around the ISU Swim program dating back as far as the early 1990s

ISU professor helps design new Speedo swimsuit that's breaking world records • News Service • Iowa State University

www.news.iastate.edu

 

[JK4ISU]

Large non-wood rackets for tennis. They’ve turned men’s tennis into serving matches instead of tennis matches.

 

[keepngoal]

interesting that there is an ISU tie to this topic. Professor Sharp was a fixture around the ISU Swim program dating back as far as the early 1990s

ISU professor helps design new Speedo swimsuit that's breaking world records • News Service • Iowa State University

www.news.iastate.edu

Really cool, thanks for sharing!

 

[jctisu]

Large non-wood rackets for tennis. They’ve turned men’s tennis into serving matches instead of tennis matches.

Sort of. More than anything it’s turned the sport into nothing but a baseline game. Crafting points, serve and volley, net game, etc. has become the mostly obsolete.

 

[jaj040]

I'm really surprised they haven't gotten rid of the 10 yard marker chain system in football yet. It was kinda fun doing it on the sidelines for highschool games, but with all the technology out there, one would think it would have happened by now.

Also on this, why are the down markers starting to go electronic? Was there anything wrong with the old dial-a-down?

 

[NickTheGreat]

Also on this, why are the down markers starting to go electronic? Was there anything wrong with the old dial-a-down?

I'm a self professed gadget guy and general tech geek. But some things are so simple and basic that the analog setup is better.

 

[pulse]

Sort of. More than anything it’s turned the sport into nothing but a baseline game. Crafting points, serve and volley, net game, etc. has become the mostly obsolete.

It’s basically beer pong now without the beer.

 

[isucy86]

I miss no replays in baseball.

Truely believe the art of the game is selling the call. First baseman pulling his foot before making catch at first to add few tenths to the catch. Catcher framing pitches. Selling a tag at shortstop. So much gamesmanship that is essentially just robotic now

You had me until catchers framing pitches. I would 100% agree there is an art to it. But I'd rather have a true strike zone for batters.

I am eager for the day when technology calls balls/strikes.

 

[MJ271]

I have no idea if it would work but my idea to fix replay is get rid of “inconclusive evidence” and have a three person review team. Whatever two of the three think is the call go with that one. Inconclusive evidence has become a cop out over the years

Somewhat related to your inconclusive evidence point, I think that referees should be allowed to occasionally defer directly to review without making a call on the field. I think back to many reviews where the play happened, the referees discussed it for 30 seconds (by which point they're reacting to what they think they saw, not what they actually saw), they make a call that they know will be reviewed anyway, then the call stands because there isn't enough evidence, even if you can tell that it's likely (but not certain) the call on the field was wrong. It would probably be best to limit that authority so it isn't used too often, but it seems like it could be useful on calls that dramatically swing the game.