Robot Umps?!

[YastrzemskI]

Yes or no? MLB doesn’t want to go there.. no way. The technology is there and in place but implementing this would be extremely controversial. Adjusting the strike zone for the size of the hitter, etc.

 

Question. Do you honestly want to see umps taken out of baseball? Should we have technology take over effective 2022?

 

My answer is NO. Terrible calls have been a part of baseball since the 1800s. Leave it as is.. even tho I wanted to smack Diaz in the face after last night’s charade of a game behind the plate.

[mvp 78]

Yes, a thousand times yes.

[moonslav59]

Just Robo umps for strike calls would be fine.

 

I'm not sure there would be a big uproar.

[YastrzemskI]

Just Robo umps for strike calls would be fine.

 

I'm not sure there would be a big uproar.

 

I think that there would be at first. A lot of whining and moping that the game is not true baseball anymore. Baseball is lost, baseball is not roboball.. blah blah. After a season or two though I think it would be accepted and praised.

[moonslav59]

I think that there would be at first. A lot of whining and moping that the game is not true baseball anymore. Baseball is lost, baseball is not roboball.. blah blah. After a season or two though I think it would be accepted and praised.

 

Maybe some, but I really don't think seeing and hearing the ump call "strike" or "ball" is something traditional fans really enjoy or will miss.

 

Getting the calls consistent has to outweigh everything else.

 

It would make batting and pitching so much easier.

 

These days teams actually prep based on who the home plate ump is. That is an absurd thought but true.

[mvp 78]

I think that there would be at first. A lot of whining and moping that the game is not true baseball anymore. Baseball is lost, baseball is not roboball.. blah blah. After a season or two though I think it would be accepted and praised.

 

With the k zone overlay, the complaints about umpiring is at an all time high.

[jad]

Of COURSE! What is more tedious to watch than a batter or pitcher complaining about a strike call?

My question is will they have a uniform strike-zone, based on, say, the 'hollow of the knee to whatever' of the average player? (It's ridiculous to have Judge and Altuve have different sized zones. I don't recall anyone lowering the basket when Mugsy Boggs drove down the lane.)

[moonslav59]

Of COURSE! What is more tedious to watch than a batter or pitcher complaining about a strike call?

My question is will they have a uniform strike-zone, based on, say, the 'hollow of the knee to whatever' of the average player? (It's ridiculous to have Judge and Altuve have different sized zones. I don't recall anyone lowering the basket when Mugsy Boggs drove down the lane.)

 

I'm sure they'll come up with something, most likely based on a precise measurement of the height of every player. You'd think they'd try to get it as close to what the K zone should be, now, but most likely something will change, slightly.

 

All we really need is consistency, and once everybody knows what a ball and stike are, it takes a lot of guesswork away from batters and pitchers.

 

One issue that may be debated is that not all 5-10 players have the same distance between the ground and their knees and so on, but I doubt they go into that kind of precision.

 

The K Zone will grow longer the taller you are, and you'll learn your K zone quickly enough.

[notin]

Of COURSE! What is more tedious to watch than a batter or pitcher complaining about a strike call?

My question is will they have a uniform strike-zone, based on, say, the 'hollow of the knee to whatever' of the average player? (It's ridiculous to have Judge and Altuve have different sized zones. I don't recall anyone lowering the basket when Mugsy Boggs drove down the lane.)

 

If we were able to use software to make a realistic looking velociraptor in 1996 and also use software to put Peter Cushing in a movie some 20 years after he died, I think we can write some software that finds a batters knees...

[jad]

I'm sure they'll come up with something, most likely based on a precise measurement of the height of every player. You'd think they'd try to get it as close to what the K zone should be, now, but most likely something will change, slightly.

 

All we really need is consistency, and once everybody knows what a ball and stike are, it takes a lot of guesswork away from batters and pitchers.

 

One issue that may be debated is that not all 5-10 players have the same distance between the ground and their knees and so on, but I doubt they go into that kind of precision.

 

The K Zone will grow longer the taller you are, and you'll learn your K zone quickly enough.

 

"Consistency" means "the same for everyone." Period. Again, do they raise and lower the mound depending on the pitcher's height or his release point?

 

And, as you point out, exactly how do they measure height?

 

Does anyone know exactly how they deal with this problem in the minor league (I forget which one) where they tried it ... they did, did they not?

[moonslav59]

If we were able to use software to make a realistic looking velociraptor in 1996 and also use software to put Peter Cushing in a movie some 20 years after he died, I think we can write some software that finds a batters knees...

 

So, a 5-10 player with abnormal ground to knee height might gain or lose a few millimeters in K Zone over other 5-10 players?

 

Is that something we should strive for? (I honestly don't know.)

 

Also, what is the official top of the K zone? I've heard various things from "the letters" to "the arm pits"

[jad]

So, a 5-10 player with abnormal ground to knee height might gain or lose a few millimeters in K Zone over other 5-10 players?

 

Is that something we should strive for? (I honestly don't know.)

 

Also, what is the official top of the K zone? I've heard various things from "the letters" to "the arm pits"

 

Yup. Totally agree. And that's why they should not bother or try for a special strike zone for every player. (How would they do that for some rookie call up who shows up for a couple of games mid season? Are they going to pause the game, strip him down ... Well, you get the idea).

 

Much easier and simpler just to give measurements. They don't widen the plate for players with exceptionally long arms.

[moonslav59]

Yup. Totally agree. And that's why they should not bother or try for a special strike zone for every player. (How would they do that for some rookie call up who shows up for a couple of games mid season? Are they going to pause the game, strip him down ... Well, you get the idea).

 

Much easier and simpler just to give measurements. They don't widen the plate for players with exceptionally long arms.

 

There is a few minor quirks that may need to be worked out. Since the initial measurements will determine to a precise degree of accuracy what each player's K zone will be, a uniform measurement protocol will need to be established and followed.

 

For instance, people are taller when they get out of bed than late at night, because they are laying down all night and gravity does not pull you down. So, the night before you are to be measured, players may decide not to lay down, so their K zone is shortened by a little bit. (Actually, it can be by more than just a little.)

 

Some players, as they age, get shorter. How often do we measure? Are some younger players still growing taller?

 

Will player have vertebras removed before measuring, then replaced afterwards? (Just kidding.)

 

Some things to think about.

 

Now, isn't this more fun than watching human umps act like dummies?

 

[jad]

There is a few minor quirks that may need to be worked out. Since the initial measurements will determine to a precise degree of accuracy what each player's K zone will be, a uniform measurement protocol will need to be established and followed.

 

For instance, people are taller when they get out of bed than late at night, because they are laying down all night and gravity does not pull you down. So, the night before you are to be measured, players may decide not to lay down, so their K zone is shortened by a little bit. (Actually, it can be by more than just a little.)

 

Some players, as they age, get shorter. How often do we measure? Are some younger players still growing taller?

 

Will player have vertebras removed before measuring, then replaced afterwards? (Just kidding.)

 

Some things to think about.

 

Now, isn't this more fun than watching human umps act like dummies?

 

 

I know. That's why custom strike zones are preposterous. Just define what the zone will be for everyone.

Edited October 20, 2021 by jad

[moonslav59]

I know. That's why custom strike zones are preposterous. Just determine what the zone will be for everyone.

 

Like one uniform zone?

 

That would be a big disadvantage to Altuve and benefit to Judge.

 

Altuve might have to swing at pitches at eye level.

[notin]

Yup. Totally agree. And that's why they should not bother or try for a special strike zone for every player. (How would they do that for some rookie call up who shows up for a couple of games mid season? Are they going to pause the game, strip him down ... Well, you get the idea).

 

Much easier and simpler just to give measurements. They don't widen the plate for players with exceptionally long arms.

 

Is this supposed to be a serious question? Why are you assuming this has to be all manual?

 

We have software and apps like M Tailor and Sizer and TailorGuide that can use your camera on your phone to measure you for custom fit pants! Pretty certain the same idea can be used to make a strike zone for a hitter…

[Maxbialystock]

talksox has fallen on hard times when everyone jumps on the robo-umps bandwagon because of the mistaken notion they/we wuz robbed last night, which in fact was not the case.

 

Human umps are an important part of the game--including their mistakes--and have been for 150 years, but now we gotta fix it because poor Eovaldi, in a losing cause, didn't get that strike called.

[YastrzemskI]

talksox has fallen on hard times when everyone jumps on the robo-umps bandwagon because of the mistaken notion they/we wuz robbed last night, which in fact was not the case.

 

Human umps are an important part of the game--including their mistakes--and have been for 150 years, but now we gotta fix it because poor Eovaldi, in a losing cause, didn't get that strike called.

 

Robo-Umps have been a topic of discussion for quite some time around the entire league.

 

If you don’t think Laz Diaz had a big part in the SoX losing last night then you should check yourself for a pulse.

[Maxbialystock]

Robo-Umps have been a topic of discussion for quite some time around the entire league.

 

If you don’t think Laz Diaz had a big part in the SoX losing last night then you should check yourself for a pulse.

 

No, I don't think he had a big part. I think the Sox lost because the bullpen fell apart--yet again and despite a very good start by Pivetta--and the lineup stopped hitting after the first inning. That trend continued tonight--no hitting and lousy bullpen--to wreck a gutsy start by Chris Sale.

 

I think you all have simply over-reacted.

 

Plus, I have to say, I like human umpires, even ones that make mistakes. Why? Because the game is played by humans who also make mistakes and whole lot more of them--which is what helps to make this game great--than the umpires do.

 

And, yes, I know this topic has come up innumerable times, but never as a separate thread populated by whiners.

 

Let me hasten to add that a precise strike zone is a myth perpetrated by that silly rectangle we all look at during the games. We think it's real and accurate, but it isn't. We also think that players see exactly what we see on the screen, which is absolutely not the case.

[YastrzemskI]

No, I don't think he had a big part. I think the Sox lost because the bullpen fell apart--yet again and despite a very good start by Pivetta--and the lineup stopped hitting after the first inning. That trend continued tonight--no hitting and lousy bullpen--to wreck a gutsy start by Chris Sale.

 

I think you all have simply over-reacted.

 

Plus, I have to say, I like human umpires, even ones that make mistakes. Why? Because the game is played by humans who also make mistakes and whole lot more of them--which is what helps to make this game great--than the umpires do.

 

And, yes, I know this topic has come up innumerable times, but never as a separate thread populated by whiners.

 

Let me hasten to add that a precise strike zone is a myth perpetrated by that silly rectangle we all look at during the games. We think it's real and accurate, but it isn't. We also think that players see exactly what we see on the screen, which is absolutely not the case.

 

Overreacted? It was a topic on sports radio programs, articles touched on it as well after last night’s debacle. This isn’t a knee jerk reaction. Nobody is a prisoner of the moment with this take. Diaz missed 23 calls last night including calls in key spots. You want to just wave it off? Fine. JD was robbed of a walk and Nate was robbed of getting out of the 8th inning. FACTS.

 

If you look at my initial post, I stated that I would rather keep the human element rather than switch to tech. The game would change considerably (many feel for the better) if the change was to be made. I’d probably hate it at first but it would eliminate the frustration that most of us feel after watching an ump call a post season baseball game like he had nothing to lose.

[jad]

I don't care about the strike call last night. I didn't even see it until today. Big whoop. I care about pointless theatrical arguments over the strike zone during games. You know perfectly well this has been a topic for years.

[jacksonianmarch]

talksox has fallen on hard times when everyone jumps on the robo-umps bandwagon because of the mistaken notion they/we wuz robbed last night, which in fact was not the case.

 

Human umps are an important part of the game--including their mistakes--and have been for 150 years, but now we gotta fix it because poor Eovaldi, in a losing cause, didn't get that strike called.

 

Interestingly, Nate wanted a pitch that a robot ump calls a ball

[illinoisredsox]

So, a 5-10 player with abnormal ground to knee height might gain or lose a few millimeters in K Zone over other 5-10 players?

 

Is that something we should strive for? (I honestly don't know.)

 

Also, what is the official top of the K zone? I've heard various things from "the letters" to "the arm pits"

 

The official top is defined as “ the area over home plate from the midpoint between a batter's shoulders and the top of the uniform pants -- when the batter is in his stance and prepared to swing at a pitched ball”

 

Doesn’t seem an simple thing to actually call. The bottom is defined as a point just below the kneecap. At least that is a fairly easy thing to visualize.

[dgalehouse]

This is not brain surgery. It is baseball. A game. Things don't have to be perfect. It's just a game. It is supposed to be fun. Part of the fun is screaming at the ump. " Get your eyes checked , Blue." Etc. Try to have fun watching it. Relax. It's not as if the Sox are on an 86 year drought. And it is not a matter of life and death. Unless you cause yourself to get a heart attack or bleeding ulcers or a nervous breakdown . And if you are going to do that , robot umps will not help.

[Maxbialystock]

I don't care about the strike call last night. I didn't even see it until today. Big whoop. I care about pointless theatrical arguments over the strike zone during games. You know perfectly well this has been a topic for years.

 

Yes, it has been a topic for years, and I think that's just dumb because it's based on that stupid rectangle on our screens which we blindly accept as accurate, truthful, etc. when it is anything but that. It's just some guy in the studio superimposing what he thinks is the strike zone and which neither the ump nor any of the players see. It is blessed and/or sanctioned by no one.

 

But, because it's on the boob tube, and we be the boobs, we give it credibility it does not deserve. Plus let's not forget that announcers and commentators who encourage us to look for perfection in that stupid rectangle.

 

I am more than happy to posit that the umpires are less than perfect on balls and strikes, but I also am fine with their human judgment and immediate call of ball or strike. Indeed, before the rectangle and the quest for perfection, commentators used to talk about how good pitchers--with excellent command--would work to expand the strike zone.

[moonslav59]

Yes, it has been a topic for years, and I think that's just dumb because it's based on that stupid rectangle on our screens which we blindly accept as accurate, truthful, etc. when it is anything but that. It's just some guy in the studio superimposing what he thinks is the strike zone and which neither the ump nor any of the players see. It is blessed and/or sanctioned by no one.

 

But, because it's on the boob tube, and we be the boobs, we give it credibility it does not deserve. Plus let's not forget that announcers and commentators who encourage us to look for perfection in that stupid rectangle.

 

I am more than happy to posit that the umpires are less than perfect on balls and strikes, but I also am fine with their human judgment and immediate call of ball or strike. Indeed, before the rectangle and the quest for perfection, commentators used to talk about how good pitchers--with excellent command--would work to expand the strike zone.

 

Max, it's not the rectangle. We all Know it's not accurate and that the ball is dropping and moving as it crosses the plate.

 

What the rectangle exposes is the inconsistency of umps. You can see the same pitch be called a ball then a strike. It's not an illusion.

 

Sure, one pitch might be dipping more than another one we think are identical, but for real, the umps suck.

 

23 missed calls are about 20 more than what is acceptable.

 

Why should a pitcher be able to "expand the strike zone?" Why should that be a part of the game?

 

Why not let good basketball players expand the hoop size when they shoot?

 

[moonslav59]

This is not brain surgery. It is baseball. A game. Things don't have to be perfect. It's just a game. It is supposed to be fun. Part of the fun is screaming at the ump. " Get your eyes checked , Blue." Etc. Try to have fun watching it. Relax. It's not as if the Sox are on an 86 year drought. And it is not a matter of life and death. Unless you cause yourself to get a heart attack or bleeding ulcers or a nervous breakdown . And if you are going to do that , robot umps will not help.

 

If you ever visit the game threads, you'll see there will never be a shortage of things for fans to scream at. If that's why some fans love the sport, don't worry. They'll get used to robo strikes called and move on to screaming at Bloom & Cora like the rest of us.

[Deja Doh]

No. The game is the game. Why not put robot players in there too? The human element is why we like playing and watching the game.

[moonslav59]

No. The game is the game. Why not put robot players in there too? The human element is why we like playing and watching the game.

 

Really?

 

Robo players?

 

We come to watch the game being played and not some bozos missing 23 calls and forcing batter and pitchers to alter their approaches.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The fake dotted line rectangle in front of batters doesn't mean much on telecasts, but the actual replays from cameras behind the batter -- that show whether the ball passes over home plate or outside of it -- mean everything.