Boston Red Sox Used Apple Watches To Steal Hand Signals From Yankees (macrumors.com) 197
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Mac Rumors: Investigators for Major League Baseball believe the Boston Red Sox, currently in first place in the American League East, have used the Apple Watch to illicitly steal hand signals from opposing teams, reports The New York Times. The Red Sox are believed to have stolen hand signals from opponents' catchers in games using video recording equipment and communicated the information with the Apple Watch. An inquiry into the Red Sox' practice started two weeks ago following a complaint from Yankees general manager Brian Cashman, who caught a member of the Red Sox training staff looking at his Apple Watch in the dugout and then relaying information to players. It's believed the information was used to determine the type of pitch that was going to be thrown. Baseball investigators corroborated the claim using video for instant replay and broadcasts before confronting the Red Sox. The team admitted that trainers received signals from video replay personnel and then shared them with some players.
"The Red Sox told league investigators said that team personnel scanning instant- replay video were electronically sending the pitch signs to the trainers, who were then passing the information to the players," reports The New York Times. [...] "The video provided to the commissioner's office by the Yankees was captured during the first two games of the series and included at least three clips. In the clips, the team's assistant athletic trainer, Jon Jochim, is seen looking at his Apple Watch and then passing information to outfielder Brock Holt and second baseman Dustin Pedroia, who was injured at the time but in uniform. In one instance, Pedroia is then seen passing the information to Young."
"The Red Sox told league investigators said that team personnel scanning instant- replay video were electronically sending the pitch signs to the trainers, who were then passing the information to the players," reports The New York Times. [...] "The video provided to the commissioner's office by the Yankees was captured during the first two games of the series and included at least three clips. In the clips, the team's assistant athletic trainer, Jon Jochim, is seen looking at his Apple Watch and then passing information to outfielder Brock Holt and second baseman Dustin Pedroia, who was injured at the time but in uniform. In one instance, Pedroia is then seen passing the information to Young."
Black Sox, Part Deux? (Score:3)
Re:Black Sox, Part Deux? (Score:4, Funny)
White Sox, Red Sox, New York Mets Sox.
Re: (Score:2)
More sux. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Black Sox, Part Deux? (Score:4, Insightful)
Where do they play? Boston.
Re: (Score:2)
One was cheating to lose, the other cheating to win. Quite a big difference in my book.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
White Sox last time, now the Red Sox? What's with teams named after socks?
The Cincinnati Reds were originally the Cincinnati Red Stockings and the name got shortened a long time ago to just Reds. I guess it was just an easy nickname to use and no chance of offending anybody to name yourself after socks. One of the more interesting baseball team names is the Nippon Ham Fighters in the Japanese league. Many Americans incorrectly parse that as Nippon - Ham Fighters like "Ham Fighters" was a thing when actually it should be Nippon Ham - Fighters. Fighters is the team name and Nip
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even more confusing, the Cincinnati Reds used to be named the Red Stockings. That got changed a long time ago, though. With good reason.
The problem I have is referring to a singular member of the team. Is he a Red Sock? But it's a x and not an s, so it's not really a plural, even though it's kind of faking it. It's definitely not a Red So. Maybe a Red Soc, just to continue the irregularity?
Red is the new Black (Score:3)
I like baseball, but.. (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't (Score:2, Insightful)
and agree with you. "So fucking what."
Re: (Score:2)
It's called cheating.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What is the difference between this and stealing another team's signs, which happens -all the time-?
It's been happening for over a century, in fact.
If your signs get stolen because you get sloppy and don't protect them or vary them, that's on you. But if you're the visiting team and the home team is using TV cameras to steal signs, that's a problem that baseball should try to eliminate. Big difference between this and run of the mill sign stealing. Using apple watches and a staff of camera men to steal signs has definitely not been happening for over a century.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that normally only a runner at second base can steal the catcher's signs, which is why they make the signs more complicated when there's a runner on second. The use of a camera and electronic relay means the signs can be stolen without any real effort and without the other team being aware that there's any danger.
Re: (Score:3)
Yankees whine, mention tech giant, get press coverage...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You can observe the other team, but not with technological assistance.
So glasses and contact lenses are out? ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Theft (Score:5, Funny)
Apart from the use of technology, which might be banned from the field, this seems like a perfectly legitimate tactic.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, if someone steals one of my signs, I assume he's just a fan of my campaign and is a secure vote.
Re: (Score:2)
You wouldn't hand sign for a car, would you?
Re: (Score:2)
Dugout Referee Manager?
Sports (Score:5, Funny)
I have noticed a inverse correlation between people who like sports and people who are good at logic, math and technology.
Sports are where you put the slow children.
Re: Sports (Score:5, Funny)
Surely sports is where you out the fast children?
Re: (Score:2)
No, special olympics are where you put the slow children.
Re: Sports (Score:2)
It is possible to be smart and physically coordinated.
Re: (Score:2)
In my graduating class (a little over 300 kids), I'd say at least 75% of the top 30 students also played at least one sport. Of course they were sports other than American football. It is possible to be smart and physically coordinated.
My graduating class was 96, IIRC, and about 80 played at least one sport. 100% also went on to four year colleges, most of which were more selective and arguably better than state schools. I don't think this proves anything, but you can take that for data.
Re: (Score:3)
Physical activity increases brain-derived neural factor, leading to higher neuroplasticity and increased rate of learning. It also increases blood flow, toxin clearing (like, actual toxins, the stuff your Cytochrome P450 enzymes and renal system cleans up, not whatever bullshit soaking in salt water is supposed to remove), dopamine levels, and reliability of your circadian system.
Motivation increases attention span, and so an interest in a particular subject drives your capacity to study and learn that s
Re: (Score:2)
In my graduating class (a little over 300 kids), I'd say at least 75% of the top 30 students also played at least one sport. Of course they were sports other than American football.
It is possible to be smart and physically coordinated.
Possible, but extremely unlikely. Your 75% of the top 30 doesn't mean shit. Not only does it not prove they were smart, it doesn't prove they played the sport to any degree of competency. All the "smart" kids go into a sport, marching band, and other "extra curricular" shit in order to fluff out a college application. It doesn't mean they're worth shit in the sport, and excelling at school doesn't mean you've got a brain between your ears. The jocks on the other hand at least actually show their prowes
Re: (Score:3)
I have noticed a inverse correlation between people who like sports and people who are good at logic, math and technology.
Sports are where you put the slow children.
You used the wrong article before "inverse" while trying to belittle others, so where do you fall in this hierarchy, below the slow athletes? Go practice your trolling elsewhere and come back once you've learned something, thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
I take it you got picked last a lot?
Re: (Score:2)
Above average people can like sports too though. My dad played college football (albeit at a small college) before he became a senior oncology and immunology researcher at a pharmaceutical lab. Condoleeza Rice was the provost of Stanford, National Security Advisor and Secretary of State, but her dream job was NFL Commissioner.
That said, I frikkin hate sports. Especially when they pre-empt The
Re: (Score:2)
Except for baseball, which is the sport of math nerds.
People who've never seen a baseball are amazed by the fact that it's mostly waiting around for something to happen. It's really impossible to enjoy baseball until you've seen a couple of hundred games. Baseball is a game of situations, and what you do in all that waiting is to compare the current situation to analogous situations and argue over which aspects of the current situation are most salient (e.g. this particular batter has gone 0 for 5 against
Re: (Score:2)
the only remaining question (Score:5, Funny)
Re:the only remaining question (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Apple did co-invent the flat look. [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
But how are the New England Patriots involved? It just sounds like their sort of thing.
Lame. Did you get that from Bleacher Report, Reddit, or some other site where the same uncreative Brady/Patriots jokes have already been posted 15 million times?
Re: (Score:2)
Check his balls (Score:2)
Re:the only remaining question (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't Boston near New England?
Boston is a part of New England [wikipedia.org] (not near)...
performance-enhancing technology (Score:3)
Baseball? (Score:2)
When are they going to ditch that boring game and replace it with Blernsball?
Re: (Score:2)
https://vimeo.com/147674727 [vimeo.com]
Fsck the Yankees (Score:2)
Until they start adhering to the salary cap, they deserve whatever underhanded tactics any other team may use.
Re: (Score:3)
No, but they do have baseball caps.
Re: Fsck the Yankees (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
it's a soft cap but it does exist. Teams can go over but they pay a penalty. NBA is similar.
They adhere to it just fine - go over the suggested limit, you pay more. And they do. It isn't like they go over the cap number then refuse to pay the luxury tax. Until MLB institutes a tougher cap like the NFL, the big market teams will continue to overpay lots of players and gladly pay the league off.
The NBA is somewhere in between with the cap structure, but their players union wields a ton of power and keep forcing the cap to increase. And of course the dramatically smaller rosters mean fewer cuts ou
naturally (Score:2)
The opposing team just needs to up their game and hack their apple accounts, or nearby wifi or cel towers. Maybe someone has a jammer installed in their mound. Then countermeasures for those countermeasures...
You too, mr haxxor, could play for the yankees!
Evolution of the game, right?
Manny being Manny (Score:2)
What is it about Boston teams that a) they're always cheating and b) they're stupid enough to get caught cheating?
I mean, Cameragate, Deflategate and now this AppleWatchgate. More steroid users than a Mr Universe competition. Corked bats, doctored baseballs and high slides. Beanballs.
I really don't care as long as nobody refers to them as the "Sox", because everyone knows that "Sox" refers to the one true Sox, my Chicago White Sox, pride of the South Side. They can take their filthy-ass, broken-down sta
Re: (Score:2)
>they're stupid enough to get caught cheating?
I know, right?
A couple of well-placed agents in the stands with good cameras and a cell phone could have handled this almost as effectively without ever getting caught.
Incompetence.
I don't see this as cheating, though, it's more of an opportunity to enter a technology arms race. The other team needs radios with throat mics on an encrypted channel so they can't be intercepted. Or maybe safety glasses with a HUD.
Re: (Score:2)
The two most corrupt States are right next to each other, Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
Re: (Score:2)
I would suggest that Texas is more corrupt than either Massachusetts or Rhode Island. The pols down there are so crooked it would make a Chicago alderman blush.
Failed to copyright (Score:2)
top 19th (Score:2)
Ummmm... (Score:2)
So what if they were....
A Brief Moment... (Score:2)
For a brief moment in history, baseball became interesting. Then it went back to being just like it was before.
i gess (Score:2)
it's about time the Yankees use encrypted electronic messages instead of hand-signs that every moron can see.
Then these complaints will be moot.
Sad... (Score:2)
Arm... heh... see what I did there?
Re:"one if by land, two if by sea" (Score:5, Insightful)
Can someone please explain how what the Red Sox did was wrong? Is there a rule against observing your opponents? Is it only wrong if it involves an Apple product?
"You can observe a lot by watching." -- Yogi Berra
Re:"one if by land, two if by sea" (Score:5, Informative)
Another article I saw made it clear the rule violation would be the use of electronic devices in the dugout. The view of major league baseball is that sign stealing is part of the game, but electronic devices are banned to keep it from being too easy and getting out of hand.
Re: (Score:3)
Major League Baseball will reportedly allow coaches and team personnel to wear Apple Watches in the dugout during games— while continuing to ban other electronic devices, including cell phones— as long as the Watch is not used for communication.
http://appleinsider.com/articl... [appleinsider.com] In 2016 iPads were allowed in the dugout with some restrictions:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/ct-mlb-ipads-dugout-20160330-story.html
Whoever got caught glancing at his watch should have used AirPods. Perhaps they are too expensive even for MLB personnel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Please be reminded that the use of electronic equipment during a game is restricted. No club shall use electronic equipment, including walkie-talkies and cellular telephones, to communicate to or with any on-field personnel, including those, in the dugout, bullpen, field and-during the game-the clubhouse. Such equipment may not be used for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a club an advantage.
Which does not prevent teams from using electronic devices. Simply that they can't be used to communicate or steal signals.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The index included this reference:
Electronic Equipment on Field—3.14(b)
However, the current PDF available from mlb.mlb.com, actually doesn't include any text for Rule 3.14 (b) other than:
"The use of any markers on the field that create a tangible reference system on the
field is prohibited."
This is Deep Baseball. If there is a game rule prohibiting using electronic devices on the field or in the dugout, but it isn't, as of today, visible nor published.
The iPad deal seems to be a corporate MLB deal, so
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: "one if by land, two if by sea" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
There's a lot of observing opponents in baseball and a lot of technology involved. The only problem was the use of electronic devices in the dugout to relay the signs. Were it not for that, the Red Sox would not have been breaking the rules.
There's a lot going on between pitches and a lot of signs relayed between coaches, the catcher, the pitcher, other defenders, the hitter, and runners. The manager or a coach could signal the catcher which pitch to throw next. The catcher then gives the signs to the p
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
The catcher then gives the signs to the pitcher about what pitch to throw next. The catcher needs to know what the next pitch is so he can position accordingly to catch it. There are also signals to the defense about positioning, which can change from one pitch to the next.
So basically the catcher is incompetent and the pitcher is incapable of picking his own pitches?
Try watching cricket, a similar game in which the guy with the ball makes his own decision on how to deliver it. A fast bowler will choose from an in swinger, out swinger, reverse swing, seam, leg break, off break, yorker, bouncer, slow ball, on a length, full, on the leg side, on off stump, outside off.. all these options and more.
He also knows how the field is set and will bowl accordingly.
Why does baseball nee
Re: (Score:3)
The difference is the bowler can see both batsmen. In baseball the catcher is the player who can see what the opposing players are doing, so he calls the pitches. The pitcher, however, doesn't always agree; sometimes they ask for a different signal.
Re:"one if by land, two if by sea" (Score:4, Insightful)
The catcher then gives the signs to the pitcher about what pitch to throw next. The catcher needs to know what the next pitch is so he can position accordingly to catch it. There are also signals to the defense about positioning, which can change from one pitch to the next.
So basically the catcher is incompetent and the pitcher is incapable of picking his own pitches?
Try watching cricket, a similar game in which the guy with the ball makes his own decision on how to deliver it. A fast bowler will choose from an in swinger, out swinger, reverse swing, seam, leg break, off break, yorker, bouncer, slow ball, on a length, full, on the leg side, on off stump, outside off.. all these options and more.
He also knows how the field is set and will bowl accordingly.
Why does baseball need every single fucking play directed by someone else?
You are comparing apple with orange. Baseball is NOT cricket. And it appears that you don't understand baseball at all if you think that the catcher is incompetent and pitcher is incapable of pitching. Baseball is about cooperative between pitcher and catcher. They must be in sync. If they could have telepathy, then there wouldn't be hand signals.
Cricket, on the other hand, is one side only. It is a completely different game strategy. If you can't distinguish between cricket and baseball, then you shouldn't make this kind of silly comment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, the bowler doesn't signal his team as to what he will in fact do?
Really? You play a game I am unfamiliar with.
Re: "one if by land, two if by sea" (Score:4, Funny)
It's a bat and a ball, what difference does it make? (Paraphrasing Hillary)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
would be similar to an American asking why there's no forward passing allowed in rugby. It's pointless
I wouldn't take offence at an American asking that question. It's not pointless, it's a legitimate question and not an obvious answer.
Indeed, I don't even know the answer, beyond "it's in the rules". It does lead to an interesting game, but at least the guy with the ball gets to choose whether to run, kick or pass backwards.
Why do you interpret a question challenging some arcane practice (that isn't even in the fucking rules) as 'arrogant'? I expect sportsmen to know how to play the fucking game, that isn't
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. It is the game of commoners and riff-raff.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, asking for the heater down and inside give the catcher a better chance of handling the ball than guessing where that 98mph fastball is going. High in his eyes? Low and outside? Oh, wait, the pitcher changes his mind and it becomes a straight change?
The only pitch you aren't trying to call for anticipated location and speed is the knuckler, and that's a catcher's skill to field.
And if you've watched much baseball, you know what happens when the catcher and pitcher get crossed up. Woops to the backstop.
Ba
Re:"one if by land, two if by sea" (Score:4, Informative)
don't tell me about the one variant that can finish in a day
Average length of a baseball game: 3 hours
Average length of a T20 cricket game: 3 hours
Nothing is as boring as a cricket match
Average 146 pitches per team per baseball game may sound higher than the minimum 120 balls per T20 cricket innings, but at an average of less than 10 hits per game baseball is actually a slower game than Test cricket, which is a five day game. In a T20 innings a team will put bat on ball for most deliveries, scoring off over half of them.
Or consider baseball's home run rate. 1-5 per match? T20 cricket averages ten 'ball out of the ground' hits a match.
People clearly enjoy baseball. That's cool. It's just silly though to claim that cricket is by comparison boring.
Re: (Score:3)
Neither Baseball or Cricket are boring, provided you realize what is happening and what is at stake.
There are many subtle nuances and "game within the game" things happening all the time in both sports.
Despite the higher velocities in Cricket, it is easier to generate offense due to paddle shape and wicket size and many other things. Nothing wrong with that.
Hitting a Baseball thrown by a Major League Pitcher (someone that actually belongs there) is one of the hardest things to do in all of sports. The hit
Re: (Score:2)
Despite the higher velocities in Cricket
I think baseball pitchers have the higher speed. They're not throwing as far and they can do a proper throw rather than being restricted to a straight arm.
I think cricket has more opportunity for the ball to do things in the air and then bouncing off the pitch adds numerous options.
But yet, the batsmen have a broader
paddle
bat. They're not called paddlesmen.
Re: (Score:2)
I was going to say that they should have invested in a pair of glasses, but oops that's technology too,.
Why does that remind me of Charlie Sheen?
(Hint: I know why - it's a joke)
Re: (Score:2)
Umm... Ethics? When does any form of cheating become acceptable?
Every time before you get caught, duh.
Re: (Score:2)
It's because you're a product of population that didn't do the smart thing and get out of Europe and the UK when things went to pot.
You simply don't have the mental agility to follow along with Baseball or Football.
And yeah, to be fair, you don't get exposed the same was you do for simpler sports like Cricket and Rugby over there.
As such, your tiny brain shuts down from the information overload and you register it as boredom.
Re: (Score:2)
They are very 'informative'; You can be certain that people who use them can come up with the stupidest ideas so very often, I don't know which causes the other.
Re: (Score:2)
You're confusing encoding with encrypting.
There's a big difference between encoding something in a secret way and encrypting.
Re: (Score:2)
The Cesar Cipher is a shared-secret cipher where the secret is so little entropy that if you know the method, you can recover the secret trivially. Because the secret is trivial to guess, it is no better than a secret encoding system. In fact it's worse from a practical standpoint than most. But it's still a cipher.
Re: (Score:2)
"Stealing hand signals"? Must be a concept invented by the same people who thought up "stealing sound waves", "stealing light" and "stealing numbers".
And "stealing base".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but it's well known that the Yankees are the cheatingest team in baseball.
Anything that makes them lose is good in my book.
Re: (Score:2)
wow, prejudiced much? I grew up in Brookline, amidst Jews, Asians, Lebanese, Palestinians, Indians, and Black people. I never heard a racist remark until I moved out of that city.
You are lying.
Re: Cheatriots (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Then allow illegal signaling to be used so that Dreamers can signal, then make it illegal again to stop the Nazis.
Where did this "Dreamers" shit originate? I hadn't heard it until yesterday, and suddenly every liberal mouthpiece is shouting about it in unison. I even got a got an email about the CADA caca at work that referenced "Dreamers". Illegal immigrants are illegal immigrants no matter what you try to brand them as. Having such a coordinated marketing effort come from one side makes me far less likely to support that side.