Robo Umps

[Platoon]

I lifted this link from another blogger whom I read with regularity. It's a lengthly piece on the concept of the electronic strike zone. I have never been a fan of the idea, mostly for reasons of tradition. But everyone has their own take on the concept. It's a pretty indepth discussion, maybe it will cause some to revisit their own perception of the whole issue. Regardless, to paraphrase what a very wise man said recently, "who would have thought balls and strikes could be so complicated"?

 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/37347/robo-strike-zone-not-simple-think/

[snap4birds]

I skimmed through that, so maybe I missed some details.  But I just wonder how it all gets implemented, while the story was more on the accuracy of the calls.  Is there still an umpire behind home plate to call safe/out, fair/foul, checkswings?  How about foul tips, is that part of the system or up to an ump?  How does the call get broadcast quickly enough for a batter to know to run on a dropped 3rd strike, or a catcher to throw out a runner?

 

I'd like to see it tried in a minor league game and see how it goes.  The players probably wouldn't like it at first.  But once they worked out most of the kinks, maybe it would be better?  

[RegularJoe62]

No thanks. Like the pitch clock, this just doesn't belong in the game. If we're doing this, why not have robot players too. 

[Dantes929]

 

No thanks. Like the pitch clock, this just doesn't belong in the game. If we're doing this, why not have robot players too. 

Yes please.   Like the pitch clock, the time has come to try this out.   If we are not doing this why not just let the players call their own balls and strikes.     Just kidding.    I would like to see it in action before coming to a conclusion.    Pitchers taking forever to throw the ball doesn't belong in the game and umpires deciding games with lousy strike zones and lousy application of lousy strike zones doesn't belong either.  It was fine when that was the best option.    All we hear is that both pitchers and batters just want consistency.   As a fan, I would prefer that as well.

[ashbury]

why not have robot players too. 

Because the game is a contest between two teams, and the umpire is not on an equal standing, so there is no connection if a different form of umpiring is chosen.

[RegularJoe62]

 

the umpire is not on an equal standing...

No, not equal to the players, but the human element of umpiring has always been part of the game. 

[nicksaviking]

No, not equal to the players, but the human element of umpiring has always been part of the game.

 

So was segregation, smoking in the dugout and actual monuments in the outfield of Yankee Stadium.

 

The goal of baseball, just as in the rest of life, should be to always look for ways to improve.

[Riverbrian]

If there are bugs... Fix Em and implement tomorrow. 

 

Will all due respect... I stand firm in my belief that wanting umpires to continue making calls is equal to wanting the grounds crew to leave the really big rocks in the infield because you like the crazy hops. 

[nicksaviking]

How about we compromise. We have robots, but the balls/strikes are instantaneously related to the umpire who still gets to make the call.

 

Now those of us who want a fair and consistent zone get it, and those who don't like aesthetic changes can keep everything looking the same.

 

And for what it's worth, if they had robots in 1880, they'd have been calling balls and strikes. I think personal traditions are great. Some family traditions are fun too, but with a large community, the essential aspects of an institution should not be reliant on tradition. EVERYONE shouldn't be beholden to and obligated by some quirky gimmick based on some antiquated premise of years past.

[ashbury]

No, not equal to the players, but the human element of umpiring has always been part of the game. 

That may be so, but the game is about the players. Suggesting to automate the players if we automate the umps is a strawman argument.

[Riverbrian]

 

How about we compromise. We have robots, but the balls/strikes are instantaneously related to the umpire who still gets to make the call.

Now those of us who want a fair and consistent zone get it, and those who don't like aesthetic changes can keep everything looking the same.

 

 

I'd be OK with this and I'd take a step further.

 

Don't tell anyone that this is happening. Don't tell the owners, the managers, the players or the fans. 

 

Just implement quietly and let the umpires roll their eyes when Bryce Harper throws his helmet and has a cow. 

 

 

[Platoon]

Robo or not there will have to be a human official behind the plate. Foul ticks, interference, line violations, foul balls grazing the screen, out of play calls. Rotations on the bases. I also think that Robo umps will change how players are viewed. Whether this is a plus or minus depends on ones viewpoint. But, during the 2020 WS, Brian Dozier, in the second year of a $180M deal, takes a 3-2 called third strike with the bases loaded, bottom of 9, Twins down by one run. Robo ump with a 99.7% accuracy rating rules the pitch hit the outside .25 of the plate. Twins color man Bert Blyleven says nary a word about black being part of the plate. While the accuracy of the call will be quite ok, the tenor of the off season would seem to change dramatically. As will how we watch a game. No more shots of a players pained expression after a called third strike as he trudges to the dugout, looking back at the plate ump. For him it's a resigned look, for the viewer at home, instead of a thoughtful self discussion on the validity of that call, it will be a benign yawn while you wait for the endless beer commercials to cease.

[Respy]

 

No thanks. Like the pitch clock, this just doesn't belong in the game. If we're doing this, why not have robot players too. 

 

I think, at least initially, the noticeable effect would be null.  There would still be umps behind the plate, and I bet that the umps will still be calling the balls and strikes, the only difference being that the ball/strike information is fed to them via earpiece.  Personally, I feel as long as there's still an umpire standing there making the calls, then it doesn't matter to me.  Might as well get it right and take away any subtle bias there may be.

[Craig Arko]

Baseball got along just fine without me before 1967. And I'm sure it will continue to flourish without me five minutes after this becomes a rule.

[ashbury]

Baseball got along just fine without me before 1967. And I'm sure it will continue to flourish without me five minutes after this becomes a rule.

You'll follow baseball only if balls and strikes are called via guesses by different people each game?

[Craig Arko]

 

You'll follow baseball only if balls and strikes are called via guesses by different people each game?

Correct. It will no longer be baseball. And I have no interest in following broadcast video games.

[Nine of twelve]

Baseball got along just fine without me before 1967. And I'm sure it will continue to flourish without me five minutes after this becomes a rule.

We'll miss you. For about a week or two. After that one of two things will happen. Either you'll realize that your decision was in error and you'll be back and be happy or you'll realize that your decision was in error but you'll be too stubborn to admit it publicly and you'll stay away and be miserable.

[Craig Arko]

 

We'll miss you. For about a week or two. After that one of two things will happen. Either you'll realize that your decision was in error and you'll be back and be happy or you'll realize that your decision was in error but you'll be too stubborn to admit it publicly and you'll stay away and be miserable.

Or 3), I'll spend my discretionary time reading instead.

[Platoon]

Another thought. What will the elimination of calling balls and strikes do to the umpiring profession. Most umpires view the plate assignment as the most coveted spot. I always did. Not only did I not enjoy the base position, I also found the plate easier to handle. You got into a rhythm and on most days it just flowed. While one could argue that for the kind of money MLB umps make, there will be plenty of them, I don't want umpires who do it for the cash. I want umpires who do it because they love what they do.

[Platoon]

Or 3), I'll spend my discretionary time reading instead.

Reading is what I would be doing right now, except I got caught up in an infantile discussion started by some poster about officiating! :)

[Nine of twelve]

Or 3), I'll spend my discretionary time reading instead.

About baseball, I'll bet.

[Craig Arko]

 

Reading is what I would be doing right now, except I got caught up in an infantile discussion started by some poster about officiating! :)

That's on you.

 

I do admit to being intrigued by this, on the other hand.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bringing-musical-stars-back-via-hologram/

[Platoon]

That's on you.

 

I do admit to being intrigued by this, on the other hand.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bringing-musical-stars-back-via-hologram/

The solution! Holographic (3D) umpires. Maybe use Leslie Nielsen in 'Naked Gun' as the prototype?

[Craig Arko]

 

The solution! Holographic (3D) umpires. Maybe use Leslie Nielsen in 'Naked Gun' as the prototype?

Or perhaps Elvis.

[Nine of twelve]

The solution! Holographic (3D) umpires. Maybe use Leslie Nielsen in 'Naked Gun' as the prototype?

We could have Bill Klem at every base and down each line for every game.

[Craig Arko]

[theBOMisthebomb]

I am agnostic when it comes to robot umps. I guess it depends if the bad call went against or for the Twins. MLB needs to get rid of instant replay if they don't want robot umps. I have always contended that camera angles are a big factor in whether a baseball call is deemed wrong or right by instant replay. Why aren't the same issues relevant with replay as they are with robo umps. From the link, "In the example below, you can see two views of the exact same pitch. From the mound view the pitch looks to be a ball, but a closeup shows it was a strike just barely on the edge of the zone...."

[Nine of twelve]

Now we know where Phil Cuzzi got his training.

[mickeymental]

 

why not have robot players too. 

they actually already tried this ... and named it bonds, clemens, palmeiro, etc. 

[LimestoneBaggy]

I would miss the skills of a good catcher framing the plate, and a good pitcher expanding the zone. I'll understand if that isn't a popular opinion, I just enjoy the added in-game of that combo vs. the umpire vs. the batter.