Robot Umps?!

[moonslav59]

im having a hard time understanding how calls made into an earpiece of the ump, and he making the call as normally done “ruins the game” for anyone.

 

It won’t even be noticeable. Just the thought of the voice whispering “ball” or “strike” into the umps ear is somehow bothering people?

 

I don’t get it.

[cp176]

im having a hard time understanding how calls made into an earpiece of the ump, and he making the call as normally done “ruins the game” for anyone.

 

It won’t even be noticeable. Just the thought of the voice whispering “ball” or “strike” into the umps ear is somehow bothering people?

 

I don’t get it.

 

i don't think that it is important to understand why some people - assuming that I am not the only one - would see robotic strike callers as one more step that leads toward changing the game. i've accepted and actually like instant replay when it is done quickly and efficiently but speaking for myself only, I don't think that more automation will make the game more enjoyable. I like as much "human element " as possible. If I were to choose not to watch the game as it continues to transform, oh well i guess that it would be my loss.

[notin]

i don't think that it is important to understand why some people - assuming that I am not the only one - would see robotic strike callers as one more step that leads toward changing the game. i've accepted and actually like instant replay when it is done quickly and efficiently but speaking for myself only, I don't think that more automation will make the game more enjoyable. I like as much "human element " as possible. If I were to choose not to watch the game as it continues to transform, oh well i guess that it would be my loss.

 

 

Changes in baseball are inevitable, robot umps or not. Not sure why this particular change is so upsetting, especially since it would most likely be unnoticeable. Not like adding a DH. Or watching player salaries spiral out of control…

[Bellhorn04]

Changes in baseball are inevitable, robot umps or not. Not sure why this particular change is so upsetting, especially since it would most likely be unnoticeable. Not like adding a DH. Or watching player salaries spiral out of control…

 

You don't think those great drawn-out dramatic moments of hitters and pitchers muttering and making faces and taking extra time to gather themselves after a perceived bad call are going to be missed?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Changes in baseball are inevitable, robot umps or not. Not sure why this particular change is so upsetting, especially since it would most likely be unnoticeable. Not like adding a DH. Or watching player salaries spiral out of control…

 

It's upsetting because anyone who has watched Twilight Zone knows it's inevitable what will happen next. Give robots control of the strike zone, and before long they'll control the scoreboards. In about a year they'll be eating our livers, with a vintage bottle of WD-40.

[notin]

It's upsetting because anyone who has watched Twilight Zone knows it's inevitable what will happen next. Give robots control of the strike zone, and before long they'll control the scoreboards. In about a year they'll be eating our livers, with a vintage bottle of WD-40.

 

I don’t think you were watching The Twilight Zone. Maybe just Twilight?

[mvp 78]

I'm pretty sure the guys they bring in to replace "the worst" will not be all that much better, if at all.

 

Why not? The younger umpires seem to have more accuracy than the old dogs they keep dragging out.

[mvp 78]

Hey I’ll take one James Joyce over an army of Angel Hernandez’s and Joe West’s….

 

At least Joyce knew when to retire.

[mvp 78]

i don't think that it is important to understand why some people - assuming that I am not the only one - would see robotic strike callers as one more step that leads toward changing the game. i've accepted and actually like instant replay when it is done quickly and efficiently but speaking for myself only, I don't think that more automation will make the game more enjoyable. I like as much "human element " as possible. If I were to choose not to watch the game as it continues to transform, oh well i guess that it would be my loss.

 

How does it change the game aside from creating a rules based strike zone?

[mvp 78]

It's upsetting because anyone who has watched Twilight Zone knows it's inevitable what will happen next. Give robots control of the strike zone, and before long they'll control the scoreboards. In about a year they'll be eating our livers, with a vintage bottle of WD-40.

 

Please.

[moonslav59]

i don't think that it is important to understand why some people - assuming that I am not the only one - would see robotic strike callers as one more step that leads toward changing the game. i've accepted and actually like instant replay when it is done quickly and efficiently but speaking for myself only, I don't think that more automation will make the game more enjoyable. I like as much "human element " as possible. If I were to choose not to watch the game as it continues to transform, oh well i guess that it would be my loss.

 

It's a human calling out "ball" or "strike," and he's getting all the calls right. I don't see how this transforms the game in a bad way, if at all.

[oldtimer]

im having a hard time understanding how calls made into an earpiece of the ump, and he making the call as normally done “ruins the game” for anyone.

 

It won’t even be noticeable. Just the thought of the voice whispering “ball” or “strike” into the umps ear is somehow bothering people?

 

I don’t get it.

Those against making the change like to demean it by calling it Robo Umpiring. In fact, it is just computer assisted strike calling to provide a more accurate result and as you say would not be noticeable. There would still be an umpire behind the plate who would still fulfill all the other duties. No one loses a job, it doesn't look different and is more accurate.

[notin]

Those against making the change like to demean it by calling it Robo Umpiring. In fact, it is just computer assisted strike calling to provide a more accurate result and as you say would not be noticeable. There would still be an umpire behind the plate who would still fulfill all the other duties. No one loses a job, it doesn't look different and is more accurate.

 

It could easily be seamless, assuming the um,pire behind the plate (who has to be there, since robot umps only do balls and strikes and NOT plays at the plate) would still be the one relaying the call to the viewers. He just does't have to perform the impossible taks of deciding whether or not a ball traveling at close to 100mph from maybe 50-55 feet away touched any part of an invisible box. Instead, he gets feedback from an automated system. Maybe if MLB had fewer pitchers capable of throwing 100mph, like they used to, this job would be easier. But they don't and it isn't...

[mvp 78]

It's a human calling out "ball" or "strike," and he's getting all the calls right. I don't see how this transforms the game in a bad way, if at all.

 

It doesn't change the game. The effect is much less noticeable than extreme shifts, starters not going longer than 4 innings, the numerous ads that a fan is subject to while at a game or watching from home.

[mvp 78]

It could easily be seamless, assuming the um,pire behind the plate (who has to be there, since robot umps only do balls and strikes and NOT plays at the plate) would still be the one relaying the call to the viewers. He just does't have to perform the impossible taks of deciding whether or not a ball traveling at close to 100mph from maybe 50-55 feet away touched any part of an invisible box. Instead, he gets feedback from an automated system. Maybe if MLB had fewer pitchers capable of throwing 100mph, like they used to, this job would be easier. But they don't and it isn't...

 

I think it's not even the speed. The problem is that umpires struggle to call outside pitches because of where they set up behind the catcher. If they went back to more substantial protection they could have a better angle on all pitches.

[moonslav59]

It doesn't change the game. The effect is much less noticeable than extreme shifts, starters not going longer than 4 innings, the numerous ads that a fan is subject to while at a game or watching from home.

 

To be honest, I don't think it will even be noticeable, except after a while, you'll start thinking, "Man, I haven't seen a bad or inconsistent call, all game!"

 

I don't see how this can be a bad thing.

 

People actually prefer some bad calls- just to "add a human element" to the game?

 

That's like saying every now and again, a basketball ref can say a basket does not count, because he did not see it go through the hoop.

[mvp 78]

To be honest, I don't think it will even be noticeable, except after a while, you'll start thinking, "Man, I haven't seen a bad or inconsistent call, all game!"

 

I don't see how this can be a bad thing.

 

People actually prefer some bad calls- just to "add a human element" to the game?

 

That's like saying every now and again, a basketball ref can say a basket does not count, because he did not see it go through the hoop.

 

"I actually like it every once in a while that my food is undercooked. It really keeps me guessing when I'm out to eat!"

[notin]

I think it's not even the speed. The problem is that umpires struggle to call outside pitches because of where they set up behind the catcher. If they went back to more substantial protection they could have a better angle on all pitches.

 

It's both. They can't get a good angle and the ball is just moving faster and faster. It's just too tough for umpires to be consistent and correct...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Can they also give robos the power to shock batters who step out of the box after every single pitch? It doesn't have to be a taser beam, just a little zap like the electrified barb wire on farm fences that keep cows in line. Batters can even be allotted one or two step-outs per at bat, in case a nat gets in the eye or a shoelace needs tying... but any time Velcro opens gets an automatic full jolt.

[moonslav59]

"I actually like it every once in a while that my food is undercooked. It really keeps me guessing when I'm out to eat!"

 

You crack me up!

[notin]

To be honest, I don't think it will even be noticeable, except after a while, you'll start thinking, "Man, I haven't seen a bad or inconsistent call, all game!"

 

I don't see how this can be a bad thing.

 

People actually prefer some bad calls- just to "add a human element" to the game?

 

That's like saying every now and again, a basketball ref can say a basket does not count, because he did not see it go through the hoop.

 

Sure. nothing makes game more exciting than watching an umpire ruin your teams season by giving the opponent a fwe extra walks and outs. and the thrill of complaining about it! And the conspiracy theories that ensue. I mean, who doesn't get thrilled by reading all those "The league doesn't want the Yankees to advance" posts?

[moonslav59]

Sure. nothing makes game more exciting than watching an umpire ruin your teams season by giving the opponent a fwe extra walks and outs. and the thrill of complaining about it! And the conspiracy theories that ensue. I mean, who doesn't get thrilled by reading all those "The league doesn't want the Yankees to advance" posts?

 

That would be replaced with, "The league is manipulating the software to ensure the Yanks win."

[mvp 78]

Can they also give robos the power to shock batters who step out of the box after every single pitch? It doesn't have to be a taser beam, just a little zap like the electrified barb wire on farm fences that keep cows in line. Batters can even be allotted one or two step-outs per at bat, in case a nat gets in the eye or a shoelace needs tying... but any time Velcro opens gets an automatic full jolt.

 

They could just allow pitchers to throw a quick pitch for any batter that does that. Ump doesn't have to allow a time call.

[mvp 78]

That would be replaced with, "The league is manipulating the software to ensure the Yanks win."

 

Doubtful. With how much data we get on each pitch, it'd be hard for the MLB to come up with a scheme that would be sneaky enough to even look like that.

[notin]

Doubtful. With how much data we get on each pitch, it'd be hard for the MLB to come up with a scheme that would be sneaky enough to even look like that.

 

Point? Think it will stop the conspiracy theories? Not like any of them have ever been based on logic or evidence...

[mvp 78]

Point? Think it will stop the conspiracy theories? Not like any of them have ever been based on logic or evidence...

 

Well, I look forward to Yankee Conspiracy Tik Toks.

[Maxbialystock]

To be honest, I don't think it will even be noticeable, except after a while, you'll start thinking, "Man, I haven't seen a bad or inconsistent call, all game!"

 

I don't see how this can be a bad thing.

 

People actually prefer some bad calls- just to "add a human element" to the game?

 

That's like saying every now and again, a basketball ref can say a basket does not count, because he did not see it go through the hoop.

 

What you don't know about basketball could fill volumes. Basketball referees miss calls in every game, especially in the NBA, but also in Div I basketball. Those missed calls are tolerated because officiating basketball is very difficult: once the ball is in play, all ten players are usually in motion and you can't just follow the ball and/or the player in possession of it. The easiest call is on made baskets. Div I does a much better job calling travelling, which is actually tolerated by the refs in the NBA, sometimes to ridiculous lengths.

[Maxbialystock]

One last time.

 

The rectangle on your screen cannot be seen by the human eye and by that I mean by any of the eyes on the field of play. It is a fabrication based on the different sizes and postures of the players and a rough definition provided in the MLB rule book. That rectangle on your screen will give the appearance but not the actuality of being able to call balls and strikes to the nearest millimeter, which is an absurd standard.

 

If robo-umps are used, MLB will become the only sport in the world officiated by cameras and computers and not by humans. There's a reason why our TV's acquired the nickname of idiot boxes.

[moonslav59]

What you don't know about basketball could fill volumes. Basketball referees miss calls in every game, especially in the NBA, but also in Div I basketball. Those missed calls are tolerated because officiating basketball is very difficult: once the ball is in play, all ten players are usually in motion and you can't just follow the ball and/or the player in possession of it. The easiest call is on made baskets. Div I does a much better job calling travelling, which is actually tolerated by the refs in the NBA, sometimes to ridiculous lengths.

 

LOL. I've played more basketball than you ever dreamed of playing. (LOL)

 

I know they miss calls, but they review the ones on baskets made. I'm surprised you did not know that.

[notin]

One last time.

 

The rectangle on your screen cannot be seen by the human eye and by that I mean by any of the eyes on the field of play. It is a fabrication based on the different sizes and postures of the players and a rough definition provided in the MLB rule book. That rectangle on your screen will give the appearance but not the actuality of being able to call balls and strikes to the nearest millimeter, which is an absurd standard.

 

If robo-umps are used, MLB will become the only sport in the world officiated by cameras and computers and not by humans. There's a reason why our TV's acquired the nickname of idiot boxes.

 

 

Unless you count tennis, track and field, and horse racing.

 

Also, MLB will still be officiated by human umpires…