Robot Umps?!

[moonslav59]

Robo players will save even more time. And we won't have all those messy labor issues and contract disputes.

 

You are so radical!

[moonslav59]

I thought Max was proposing Robo Managers.

 

Robo ball girls (with "enahanced" features) would be great!

[mvp 78]

Oh sure we will.

 

Thanks to advancements in AI, robots have learned to create arguments and develop their own languages. The ability to negotiate is inevitable, and the ability to out-negotiate humans and financially ruin MLB for the sake of greedy robots then becomes the obvious next step...

 

And then the robots will become robot owners and they will force all fans to have cybernetic MLB implants.

[mvp 78]

Bobo ball girls would be great!

 

Balls will no longer be used. Lasers only.

 

Mascots will NOT be robots. They will be genetically engineered and will feel pain whenever the opposing team scores a run.

[notin]

Another advantage to Robo players would be no covid issues. Maybe we could play the whole thing on the internet on virtual fields. That way we would have no pre game and post game traffic jams.

 

Here is the sad part.

 

Beyond how foolish this slippery slope argument is, the reality is e-sports leagues already exist. What advantage would MLB have to break into those leagues?

 

And as many of the virtual players used in e-leagues are based on real players, if MLB implemented robots, the e-leagues would have no source material and therefore would collapse. So if MLB tried this step, they would be taking themselves down.

 

Of course, the real problem is there is absolutely no link between the automated calling of balls and strikes leading to turning MLB into an e-league....

[notin]

And then the robots will become robot owners and they will force all fans to have cybernetic MLB implants.

 

And our seats will become pods that drain us of our natural electrical impulses, which are then used to power the players on the field. Teams like the Marlins who have no attendance might see a player shut down and stop completely mid-inning...

[notin]

Balls will no longer be used. Lasers only.

 

Mascots will NOT be robots. They will be genetically engineered and will feel pain whenever the opposing team scores a run.

 

No. Mascots need to be robots so we can have Battlebots-style fights in between innings. f*** sausage races!

[mvp 78]

And our seats will become pods that drain us of our natural electrical impulses, which are then used to power the players on the field. Teams like the Marlins who have no attendance might see a player shut down and stop completely mid-inning...

 

In "person" attendance will no longer be required. Laserparks will now look like a dystopian Monday Night Raw from 2020. https://www.wrestlerant.com/columnist-corner/monday-night-raw-review-august-31-2020

[a700hitter]

Robo managers at their press conferences would say things like:

 

”He battled in that AB”

”He has been impacting the ball”

”We like the way the ball has been coming out of his hand.”

”The season is a marathon not a sprint”

”He has electric stuff”

”We love his energy”

”The metrics indicate”

 

plus 5,000 other pre-programmed responses. What’s that you say, we already have robot managers?

[mvp 78]

No. Mascots need to be robots so we can have Battlebots-style fights in between innings. f*** sausage races!

 

They could still fight to the death even as organic matter. It'd be a blood sport.

[mvp 78]

Elktonnick won't even need to post anymore. Robots will do all the complaining for him. He can just sit back, enjoy some mushed Fenway Franks and no longer worry that friends like Muggah are no longer allowed to post.

[mvp 78]

And our seats will become pods that drain us of our natural electrical impulses, which are then used to power the players on the field. Teams like the Marlins who have no attendance might see a player shut down and stop completely mid-inning...

 

That will be when West Coast bias finally becomes a factor as they will have more energy for those 1AM EDT rallys.

[notin]

Elktonnick won't even need to post anymore. Robots will do all the complaining for him. He can just sit back, enjoy some mushed Fenway Franks and no longer worry that friends like Muggah are no longer allowed to post.

 

Are you sure that is not already happening?

[mvp 78]

Are you sure that is not already happening?

 

A lot of moon's posts do seem like they are run in a simulation...

[Elktonnick]

Here is the sad part.

 

Beyond how foolish this slippery slope argument is, the reality is e-sports leagues already exist. What advantage would MLB have to break into those leagues?

 

And as many of the virtual players used in e-leagues are based on real players, if MLB implemented robots, the e-leagues would have no source material and therefore would collapse. So if MLB tried this step, they would be taking themselves down.

 

Of course, the real problem is there is absolutely no link between the automated calling of balls and strikes leading to turning MLB into an e-league....

First of all it is impossible to prove with ontological certitude that the slippery slope argument is foolish. Secondly there is no reason to assume that any and all future e leagues would be based solely on real players. It could be legally possible to base future e leagues on players long since deceased or players crafted solely for the leagues purposes. Finally it's impossible to assert with any degree of certitude that automated calling of balls and strikes will.not lead to automating the entire game. Just ask all those unemployed highway toll booth operators what happened when they began automating the taking of tolls on American highways or all those Bell telephone operators who we used to call when I was in grade school to make a telephone call or all those key punch typists who we used to train.

[Elktonnick]

Elktonnick won't even need to post anymore. Robots will do all the complaining for him. He can just sit back, enjoy some mushed Fenway Franks and no longer worry that friends like Muggah are no longer allowed to post.

 

Funny I am not the one complaining about the umpiring. Ever heard of projection?

[mvp 78]

Funny I am not the one complaining about the umpiring. Ever heard of projection?

 

No, tell me more.

[mvp 78]

Embrace tradition. Throw away modernity. Get rid of all electronic scoreboards now!

[jad]

Embrace tradition. Throw away modernity. Get rid of all electronic scoreboards now!

 

And for God's sake (my pet peeve!) STOP TELEVISING GAMES! Think what that does to attendance. Shees! Ever noticed that that 86-year-WS-drought happened during the rise of radio and tv broadcasts? As did the precipitous increase in ticket prices??? Coincidence???!!!! Come on, people!

[moonslav59]

Embrace tradition. Throw away modernity. Get rid of all electronic scoreboards now!

 

It all went downhill when they put lights in ballparks.

[mvp 78]

And for God's sake (my pet peeve!) STOP TELEVISING GAMES! Think what that does to attendance. Shees! Ever noticed that that 86-year-WS-drought happened during the rise of radio and tv broadcasts? As did the precipitous increase in ticket prices??? Coincidence???!!!! Come on, people!

 

Any game that is witnessed where a crows of fans isn't filling out a scorecard isn't really a baseball game at all.

[notin]

Embrace tradition. Throw away modernity. Get rid of all electronic scoreboards now!

 

It is somewhat amazing fans will embrace actual game-altering changes to the game, like specialized bullpens, DH's (but in one league only!!!), 3 batter minimums, fouls balls as strikes, foul poles and no more "last seen fair", 162 game schedules, free agency, mound visits, banned pitches, instant replay, etc. And fans are accept it. But someone proposes improving the ball and strikes calling, and suddenly it's the end of the game as we know it..

[notin]

It all went downhill when they put lights in ballparks.

 

I thought it all went downhill when they started letting pitchers throw overhand...

[notin]

Embrace tradition. Throw away modernity. Get rid of all electronic scoreboards now!

 

Good thing Branch Rickey wasn't a fan of tradition...

[notin]

First of all it is impossible to prove with ontological certitude that the slippery slope argument is foolish. Secondly there is no reason to assume that any and all future e leagues would be based solely on real players. It could be legally possible to base future e leagues on players long since deceased or players crafted solely for the leagues purposes. Finally it's impossible to assert with any degree of certitude that automated calling of balls and strikes will.not lead to automating the entire game. Just ask all those unemployed highway toll booth operators what happened when they began automating the taking of tolls on American highways or all those Bell telephone operators who we used to call when I was in grade school to make a telephone call or all those key punch typists who we used to train.

 

Seriously?

 

THAT is the example you're going to use? It's not even pertinent, since you used an example where the automation did the same job as the people who were replaced. Calling balls and strikes is not the province of the players.

 

Or are you thinking bout how when pin boys were replaced by a system that reset the pins automatically in every bowling alley, and then within hours, there was nothing but robot bowlers? Oh wait. That didn't happen.

 

And really, proving it is foolish is done quite easily. The last few pages of this thread offer evidence to that effect. Just because you deny this proven truth does not make it less proven...

[Maxbialystock]

We watch the games to see the players perform. We don't watch to see the umps perform. Ideally, game officials are not noticed. But with balls and strikes calls, umps get noticed a lot.

 

I'll pick on you even though I know you speak with and for a bunch of folks

 

First, you are completely wrong that we don't watch the umpires perform. Of course we do, and we sure as heck don't want them to be invisible. This is true not only for baseball, but for almost any sport you name. Umpires/referees are a very visible and necessary part of any contested sport. They make important, timely, authoritative decisions, and, best of all, we can see them and even find fault with them.

 

You are also wrong about the undue focus on balls and strikes being the result of idiot umpires. The simple fact is that balls and strikes--that is, two guys basically playing catch with nothing else going on--consume over half of every freaking MLB game.

 

Take, for example, the final 3 games of the ALCS, which averaged 3:41 in length and, including both teams, 279 pitches thrown per game.

 

Of that 3 hours and 41 minutes average length per game, we can assume 17 half inning timeouts, each lasting 2 minutes and 45 seconds--for a total of 47 minutes. Throw in maybe 15 min per game for resolution of contested calls, 10 minutes of real action resulting from batted balls, and 20 minutes for those relief pitchers--not all--called in during an inning, to warm up. That leaves, as I said, over two freaking hours of pitch and catch and nothing else.

 

Indeed, all but 10 minutes of every MLB game is either pitch and catch or timeouts for mid-inning timeouts, timeouts for replays, timeouts for relief pitchers to warm up, or time for players and/or managers to gripe about something.

 

I do recognize of course that real fans are usually completely absorbed by the battle between hitter and pitcher. This is especially true of the TV audience, especially now that we have that lovely rectangle and all manner of computer analysis on a hitter's strike zone strengths and weaknesses, what pitches are being used and how well, the velocity of both pitches and batted balls, etc. And, of course, the accuracy of the ball and strike calls by the home plate umpire. Indeed, the genius of that rectangle is that it gives us and the announcers something more to ponder and argue about during that inordinate amount of time during which we are simply watching pitch and catch. It's great TV.

 

Yet you and others want to eliminate those imperfections with a puritanical zeal our ancestors (in Massachusetts, anyway) would have applauded, but which I would argue make the game that much more interesting. Let me be clear: I don't expect or even want perfect umpiring. I also don't want terrible umpires, but believe those are rare in MLB. I also don't mind the idea of improving umpires just as players can be improved by using technology to provide feedback. Plus I think umpires should be evaluated regularly and the evaluations acted upon.

 

I also am not buying the fairness argument. That is, you cannot convince me that games are being won and lost--other than on rare occasions--by the calls of the umpires. And that absolutely applies to the events of the ALCS, which is what started this thread. The Sox did not lose to the Astros because of that one call everyone is exercised over. They lost because the Astros pitchers--with the exact same set of home plate umpires as the Sox pitchers and hitters faced--were simply better than the Sox pitchers--and by a big margin. But don't believe me. Read the sports news and get back to me when you find any commentator anywhere who says the Sox got screwed and lost game 4 of the ALCS because Eovaldi really did strike that guy out.

[moonslav59]

I thought it all went downhill when they started letting pitchers throw overhand...

 

Or when they let players use gloves.

[moonslav59]

I'll pick on you even though I know you speak with and for a bunch of folks

 

First, you are completely wrong that we don't watch the umpires perform. Of course we do, and we sure as heck don't want them to be invisible. This is true not only for baseball, but for almost any sport you name. Umpires/referees are a very visible and necessary part of any contested sport. They make important, timely, authoritative decisions, and, best of all, we can see them and even find fault with them.

 

You are also wrong about the undue focus on balls and strikes being the result of idiot umpires. The simple fact is that balls and strikes--that is, two guys basically playing catch with nothing else going on--consume over half of every freaking MLB game.

 

Take, for example, the final 3 games of the ALCS, which averaged 3:41 in length and, including both teams, 279 pitches thrown per game.

 

Of that 3 hours and 41 minutes average length per game, we can assume 17 half inning timeouts, each lasting 2 minutes and 45 seconds--for a total of 47 minutes. Throw in maybe 15 min per game for resolution of contested calls, 10 minutes of real action resulting from batted balls, and 20 minutes for those relief pitchers--not all--called in during an inning, to warm up. That leaves, as I said, over two freaking hours of pitch and catch and nothing else.

 

Indeed, all but 10 minutes of every MLB game is either pitch and catch or timeouts for mid-inning timeouts, timeouts for replays, timeouts for relief pitchers to warm up, or time for players and/or managers to gripe about something.

 

I do recognize of course that real fans are usually completely absorbed by the battle between hitter and pitcher. This is especially true of the TV audience, especially now that we have that lovely rectangle and all manner of computer analysis on a hitter's strike zone strengths and weaknesses, what pitches are being used and how well, the velocity of both pitches and batted balls, etc. And, of course, the accuracy of the ball and strike calls by the home plate umpire. Indeed, the genius of that rectangle is that it gives us and the announcers something more to ponder and argue about during that inordinate amount of time during which we are simply watching pitch and catch. It's great TV.

 

Yet you and others want to eliminate those imperfections with a puritanical zeal our ancestors (in Massachusetts, anyway) would have applauded, but which I would argue make the game that much more interesting. Let me be clear: I don't expect or even want perfect umpiring. I also don't want terrible umpires, but believe those are rare in MLB. I also don't mind the idea of improving umpires just as players can be improved by using technology to provide feedback. Plus I think umpires should be evaluated regularly and the evaluations acted upon.

 

I also am not buying the fairness argument. That is, you cannot convince me that games are being won and lost--other than on rare occasions--by the calls of the umpires. And that absolutely applies to the events of the ALCS, which is what started this thread. The Sox did not lose to the Astros because of that one call everyone is exercised over. They lost because the Astros pitchers--with the exact same set of home plate umpires as the Sox pitchers and hitters faced--were simply better than the Sox pitchers--and by a big margin. But don't believe me. Read the sports news and get back to me when you find any commentator anywhere who says the Sox got screwed and lost game 4 of the ALCS because Eovaldi really did strike that guy out.

 

It's impossible to prove any game was lost by a bad strike/ball call, but if you really think it never has, then so be it.

 

It's not some puritanical pursuit for perfection that drives the debate for robo umps calling ball & strikes. It's about making the game more about the players than the umps.

 

You do know teams hold strategy meetings based on who is umping tonight's game, right?

 

How absurd is that?

 

Oh, and yes fans go and watch the umps, but they don't go to watch the umps.

[Maxbialystock]

It's impossible to prove any game was lost by a bad strike/ball call, but if you really think it never has, then so be it.

 

It's not some puritanical pursuit for perfection that drives the debate for robo umps calling ball & strikes. It's about making the game more about the players than the umps.

 

You do know teams hold strategy meetings based on who is umping tonight's game, right?

 

How absurd is that?

 

Oh, and yes fans go and watch the umps, but they don't go to watch the umps.

 

Americans have embraced baseball with fallible umpires for 150 years. Now, because of that rectangle on your TV screen which none of players can see, you want to get the umpires out of the business of umpiring.

 

You don't think strategy meetings about how home plate umpires call balls and strikes haven't been going on for at least 100 years?

[S5Dewey]

Baseball is based on the assumption that umpires are always going to get it right - but they don't. When an pitcher throws a pitch that is outside the zone and the umpire calls it a strike the pitcher then has a HUGE advantage. He can then throw another (unhittable) pitch outside the strike zone and the hitter then has to decide whether to swing at another (unhittable) pitch in that same place or hope that the umpire will get it right this time. IMO that has a bigger impact on games than isolated calls that the ump got wrong.

 

I've been somewhat ambivalent about robo-umps in the past but the more I see of the game the more I think they're needed, probably not for every pitch but managers should be allowed to 'challenge' a certain number of pitches per game that could be reviewed.