Robot Umps?!

[Bellhorn04]

What if it's a fraction of a second at 1b?

 

If the runner slides into the base, yes.

 

You're only safe if you momentarily lose contact with the bag after hitting it.

[mvp 78]

If the runner slides into the base, yes.

 

You're only safe if you momentarily lose contact with the bag after hitting it.

 

How long is a "moment?"

[Bellhorn04]

How long is a "moment?"

 

Fast enough that you couldn't see it with the naked eye.

[Kimmi]

You just admitted enjoying it after saying you don't. (It's not about the words chosen by me, anyway.)

 

There is no dehumanization of the game going on, and the umps are not dehumanized either. They are given a tool to do a better job, and they still have to make calls other thn balls and strikes.

 

You are choosing to interpret my words to suit your argument. I do not enjoy missed calls.

 

There is absolutely dehumanization of the game going on. If you replace humans with machines, that's can't be called anything else but dehumanization.

[Kimmi]

Guess what - this is a post that clearly explains how I feel about this issue. Thanks for expressing it the way you have.

 

Amen, cp.

[Kimmi]

Officiating just isn’t part of any sport I want to enjoy. I just want them to quietly make calls correctly, equally and fairly and be non-factors.

 

And ball/strike calls are just a ridiculous task to ask any human being to perform…

 

That is a fair and respectful opinion, not that I agree with it.

[Kimmi]

And we're not saying the whole 10% comes from borderline calls. A lot of the missed calls are no-doubters. If you follow games on Gameday you will see pitches called strikes where the whole ball is outside the zone with "daylight" in between. Like the one Diaz called on JD in Game 4.

 

I would not put a whole lot of stock into the zone used on Gameday. I've seen some pitches on there that don't look much like the pitch seen live.

 

I don't disagree that there are some egregious errors made.

[Kimmi]

She seems to be saying she doesn't like the missed calls per se, but enjoys the players' reactions to them. But it does seem like a mixed message.

 

Not a mixed message at all.

[Kimmi]

Yeah ask anyone who has umpired a local game how much they like the way 'fans' and parents of entitled kids express their 'enjoyment' of what they feel are missed calls (i.e., any call that goes against their team or their kid).

 

This has nothing to do with the argument at hand.

[Kimmi]

Even fair/foul calls cannot be challenged unless the ball was a home run. And they won't be, because there are no guidelines for what to do with baserunners.

 

I think baseball has done a pretty poor job overall with instant replay. It works out pretty well for safe/out calls at 1b, but far too often it is used to reverse calls on baserunners because they separated from the bag for a frantion of a second during their slide...

 

Is it okay to get these calls wrong? If we're not tolerant of any human error from the umpires, then replay should be allowed for any type of call, no matter how insignificant it may seem. Not that I'm advocating for that.

[Kimmi]

We wouldn't even be talking about this if it wasn't for the super-high-res-stop-action shots of guys whose shoe separates from the bag by a millimeter for a nanosecond.

 

But don't we want to get every call right?

 

That's what I'm hearing from you robo ump advocates.

[Kimmi]

Simple solution. Get rid of instant replay.

[moonslav59]

Is it okay to get these calls wrong? If we're not tolerant of any human error from the umpires, then replay should be allowed for any type of call, no matter how insignificant it may seem. Not that I'm advocating for that.

 

The balls and strike calls would not delay the game by even a minute.

 

Replays on every play would.

[moonslav59]

You are choosing to interpret my words to suit your argument. I do not enjoy missed calls.

 

There is absolutely dehumanization of the game going on. If you replace humans with machines, that's can't be called anything else but dehumanization.

 

It's you twisting words.

 

There is no replacing any umps by having the ball & strike calls whispered in their ear piece.

 

It won't be noticeable.

 

Saying it has to be called "dehumanization" is like saying the players starting to wear gloves took away from the human element of pain involved with the great pastime of yesteryear. It was clear dehumanization.

Edited November 3, 2021 by moonslav59

[S5Dewey]

But don't we want to get every call right?

 

That's what I'm hearing from you robo ump advocates.

 

That's not what you're hearing from me. Yes, I DO want them to get every call right but not at the expense of "dehumanizing the game". I can live with the garden variety missed calls but at the same time I want the umpire to know immediately when he's made an egregiously bad call.

I want that for two reasons. First I want the hitter to have every fair opportunity to hit the ball - something he doesn't have when an umpire makes a call so bad that we all go, "Ugh".

But second and maybe more importantly I want that umpire to be publicly corrected, not for any vindictive reason but as an incentive to make his 'game' better. Without that the bad calls are usually forgotten within a couple of batters and the umpire is validated.

Hence, I want hitters/managers to have a limited number of "challenges" of b/s calls in a game.

Edited November 3, 2021 by S5Dewey

[Bellhorn04]

But don't we want to get every call right?

 

That's what I'm hearing from you robo ump advocates.

 

OK, but we're also allowed to look at whether it's fair to expect a sliding baseball cleat to maintain perfect contact with a canvas bag. It's not a serious issue like the one with balls and strikes.

[jad]

This has nothing to do with the argument at hand.

 

Oh. I get it. Only the arguments supporting one's own view of things "have to do with the argument at hand." Thus: revelling in the drama of whether the umpire gets a call right is relevant; worrying about fan abuse of umpires who make (easily avoidable) erroneous calls is not.

 

I don't know which side is 'right'. I do know that the strained arguments in favor of allowing humans to make bad calls for which they will be reviled are among the most idiotic I've ever seen (in what is a very VERY competitive field). Let's go back to arguing about whether we should have released Hanley Ramirez or the importance of D(or is it Q?)War so we don't embarrass ourselves any more or, worse, encourage our opponents to embarrass themselves even further.

[Bellhorn04]

That's it, no more arguing from me on this topic, it's a little too political. I respect and understand the views of those who are opposed to this.

 

I think in the final analysis it's one of those "majority rules" issues.

[moonslav59]

That's it, no more arguing from me on this topic, it's a little too political. I respect and understand the views of those who are opposed to this.

 

I think in the final analysis it's one of those "majority rules" issues.

 

I think several horses have been beaten to death on this.

 

I concur. Majority rules: Robo Umps for Balls & Strikes in 2020.

 

Those in favor: Yipee!

 

Those opposed: You'll hardly notice!

 

Adiois, amigos.

[mvp 78]

Fast enough that you couldn't see it with the naked eye.

 

Clear as mud.

[mvp 78]

Is it okay to get these calls wrong? If we're not tolerant of any human error from the umpires, then replay should be allowed for any type of call, no matter how insignificant it may seem. Not that I'm advocating for that.

 

The only reason to limit reviews is to keep the game moving. Robo k zone doesn't negatively affect the pace of play.

[Bellhorn04]

Clear as mud.

 

The whole point is that instant replay shouldn't be used to detect if the foot lifted off the bag by a millimeter for a nanosecond after it hit the bag. It should be used to detect if the foot hit the bag before the tag (or the force out). It's a simple argument. If you disagree, that's fine, obviously.

[notin]

Is it okay to get these calls wrong? If we're not tolerant of any human error from the umpires, then replay should be allowed for any type of call, no matter how insignificant it may seem. Not that I'm advocating for that.

 

This is entering a slippery slope argument.

 

The bottom line is we all want the games to be called correctly and fairly. And just because this cannot necessarily be done for every type of call doesn't mean it shouldn't be done for any type of call. It doesn't have to be 100% or nothing.

 

The fact that baseball limited implemented instant replay to correct egregious calls and did so without implementing automated balls and strikes should dispel these types of arguments...

[mvp 78]

The whole point is that instant replay shouldn't be used to detect if the foot lifted off the bag by a millimeter for a nanosecond after it hit the bag. It should be used to detect if the foot hit the bag before the tag (or the force out). It's a simple argument. If you disagree, that's fine, obviously.

 

I would need to see clear wording on how the rule would be written. Otherwise, it seems like the greyest of all rules to enforce.

[mvp 78]

This is entering a slippery slope argument.

 

The bottom line is we all want the games to be called correctly and fairly. And just because this cannot necessarily be done for every type of call doesn't mean it shouldn't be done for any type of call. It doesn't have to be 100% or nothing.

 

The fact that baseball limited implemented instant replay to correct egregious calls and did so without implementing automated balls and strikes should dispel these types of arguments...

 

Honestly, instant replay is more disruptive than an automated strike zone.

[notin]

Honestly, instant replay is more disruptive than an automated strike zone.

 

It is. But I will give MLB umps credit for being faster than NFL refs.

 

I do think the whole baserunning thing is just going too far, although I have my doubts it will ever be addressed...

[Bellhorn04]

I would need to see clear wording on how the rule would be written. Otherwise, it seems like the greyest of all rules to enforce.

 

I don't see why it's that complicated. It's just a matter of specifying what the replay can overturn.

[Bellhorn04]

Honestly, instant replay is more disruptive than an automated strike zone.

 

We don't really know that yet.

[mvp 78]

We don't really know that yet.

 

Yeah, we do because robo umps are being used in some MiLB games.

[Bellhorn04]

Yeah, we do because robo umps are being used in some MiLB games.

 

And haven't there been some issues?