Robot Umps?!

[Maxbialystock]

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.

 

Playing ain't the same as watching officials on TV, which I've been doing since 1953 with the Celtics. When you used your analogy to basketball, you specified the ball going through the hoop, which anyone can see easily. The replays are used to determine whether the ball was unfairly prevented from going in or aided in going in. Also to confirm that the ball left the shooter's hand before the shot clock or game clock expired.

 

But the point I keep making and you keep ignoring is that those replays are to aid the human officials.

 

You want to get the middle man out of there so that you the viewer don't have to be outraged repeatedly during games because the human umpire ain't in concert with that made-up rectangle (and none of us currently know by whom or how it is created) on our TV screens.

[Bellhorn04]

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.

 

Max, you keep talking about the rectangle and the height differences.

 

I would guess that most of the really bad calls that people complain about are errors to do with the width of the strike zone, which has nothing to do with height.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure that there will be player height adjustments when the time comes...

[Maxbialystock]

Max, you keep talking about the rectangle and the height differences.

 

I would guess that most of the really bad calls that people complain about are errors to do with the width of the strike zone, which has nothing to do with height.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure that there will be player height adjustments when the time comes...

 

The width of the strike zone also depends on the trajectory of the baseball as it crosses the plate. Does the back of the plate count equally with the front of the plate?

 

But, to be honest, my real complaint with robo-umps is not so much whether they are more accurate than human umps, because it's easy to concede that they would be.

 

No, my fury is over the very notion of turning over the game of baseball to robots--to get rid of that pernicious human element, which is in fact at the core of every sport. While replays are used in all kinds of sports, they are used to help human officials, and not in the pervasive manner with which robots will take over MLB. You yearn for roboball. I'm fine with baseball, played by humans and umpired by humans.

[jad]

The width of the strike zone also depends on the trajectory of the baseball as it crosses the plate. Does the back of the plate count equally with the front of the plate?

 

But, to be honest, my real complaint with robo-umps is not so much whether they are more accurate than human umps, because it's easy to concede that they would be.

 

No, my fury is over the very notion of turning over the game of baseball to robots--to get rid of that pernicious human element, which is in fact at the core of every sport. While replays are used in all kinds of sports, they are used to help human officials, and not in the pervasive manner with which robots will take over MLB. You yearn for roboball. I'm fine with baseball, played by humans and umpired by humans.

 

Why then have foul lines? We never had them as kids. (More mechanical manipulation replacing the human element of just looking and seeing whether a ball is fair). Why even have a strike zone? (They didn't have one in the early days of baseball, and the game hasn't been the same since).

[notin]

The width of the strike zone also depends on the trajectory of the baseball as it crosses the plate. Does the back of the plate count equally with the front of the plate?

 

But, to be honest, my real complaint with robo-umps is not so much whether they are more accurate than human umps, because it's easy to concede that they would be.

 

No, my fury is over the very notion of turning over the game of baseball to robots--to get rid of that pernicious human element, which is in fact at the core of every sport. While replays are used in all kinds of sports, they are used to help human officials, and not in the pervasive manner with which robots will take over MLB. You yearn for roboball. I'm fine with baseball, played by humans and umpired by humans.

 

It still would be umpired by humans. This is not about replacing anyone.

 

Track and field has used automated timers for decades. Do you think that sport has been overrun with automation? And that’s one sport where the automation actually replaced the human officials. MLB is not going to replace anyone

[Bellhorn04]

Track and field has used automated timers for decades. Do you think that sport has been overrun with automation? And that’s one sport where the automation actually replaced the human officials. MLB is not going to replace anyone

 

And how comical/tragic would it be if we manually timed Olympic sprints?

[moonslav59]

The width of the strike zone also depends on the trajectory of the baseball as it crosses the plate. Does the back of the plate count equally with the front of the plate?

 

But, to be honest, my real complaint with robo-umps is not so much whether they are more accurate than human umps, because it's easy to concede that they would be.

 

No, my fury is over the very notion of turning over the game of baseball to robots--to get rid of that pernicious human element, which is in fact at the core of every sport. While replays are used in all kinds of sports, they are used to help human officials, and not in the pervasive manner with which robots will take over MLB. You yearn for roboball. I'm fine with baseball, played by humans and umpired by humans.

 

Wow. "Fury" over an invisible earpiece in the human home plate umpire's ear whispering the right call in his ear.

 

Oh! The humanity!

[cp176]

Well it is clear to see that all 5,6 or maybe 7 of you have made up your minds about how much more beneficial to the game it would be to have robots calling the balls and strikes. Hope you don't mind someone disagreeing with you. There have been many changes made to the game which I have had no problem with at all but personally I do not think that this move would make the game particularly interesting for me to watch. Hey look before you pile on - I don't care for the way basketball is played these days and it is a game that I know a little about. What can I say- I wish that the 3 point line had never been created. Losing me or the few others who share my opinion obviously won't hurt the game.

[cp176]

Wow. "Fury" over an invisible earpiece in the human home plate umpire's ear whispering the right call in his ear.

 

Oh! The humanity!

 

 

Fury? really?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Well it is clear to see that all 5,6 or maybe 7 of you have made up your minds about how much more beneficial to the game it would be to have robots calling the balls and strikes. Hope you don't mind someone disagreeing with you. There have been many changes made to the game which I have had no problem with at all but personally I do not think that this move would make the game particularly interesting for me to watch. Hey look before you pile on - I don't care for the way basketball is played these days and it is a game that I know a little about. What can I say- I wish that the 3 point line had never been created. Losing me or the few others who share my opinion obviously won't hurt the game.

 

Unfortunately, in baseball, technology has caused the need for more technology. The networks' contrived two-dimensional "box" that supposedly outlines the strike zone for viewers has only caused false rage about close calls by human umpires. The indignation even carries over to the stands, where fans with phones can watch replays or see other animated angles on MLB Gameday. There really may be no more blown calls than ever before, just new ways to show them and tabulate them.

 

Someone made a good point about robos -- will they make calls where the pitch just reaches the front edges of home plate (like we see on TV boxes), or go three-dimensional and call pitches through the depth of the plate? This may require side-view cameras. If the latter, there may actually be more strikes called by robos... imagine a high curveball that human umps always give up on out of the pitcher's hand, but that actually breaks late across the batter's letters just before it reaches the catcher's mitt.

[cp176]

Unfortunately, in baseball, technology has caused the need for more technology. The networks' contrived two-dimensional "box" that supposedly outlines the strike zone for viewers has only caused false rage about close calls by human umpires. The indignation even carries over to the stands, where fans with phones can watch replays or see other animated angles on MLB Gameday. There really may be no more blown calls than ever before, just new ways to show them and tabulate them.

 

Someone made a good point about robos -- will they make calls where the pitch just reaches the front edges of home plate (like we see on TV boxes), or go three-dimensional and call pitches through the depth of the plate? This may require side-view cameras. If the latter, there may actually be more strikes called by robos... imagine a high curveball that human umps always give up on out of the pitcher's hand, but that actually breaks late across the batter's letters just before it reaches the catcher's mitt.

 

I think that you made some great points here. Technology of course and rightfully so is here to stay. i do think that overdosing on it doesn't improve one's quality of life though. When i go to the golf course (which is most days) the telephone does not go with me.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I think that you made some great points here. Technology of course and rightfully so is here to stay. i do think that overdosing on it doesn't improve one's quality of life though. When i go to the golf course (which is most days) the telephone does not go with me.

 

Hey, cp -- everyone should be welcome to dissenting opinions on discussion boards -- but always be prepared to be mocked by a poster or two who knows for sure that only their opinion is the right one. And as a few have admitted, it is very rare that any poster can change the opinion of another (which I thought a worthy goal when I first joined; so there's one instance where others have changed my mind).

[Bellhorn04]

Unfortunately, in baseball, technology has caused the need for more technology. The networks' contrived two-dimensional "box" that supposedly outlines the strike zone for viewers has only caused false rage about close calls by human umpires. The indignation even carries over to the stands, where fans with phones can watch replays or see other animated angles on MLB Gameday. There really may be no more blown calls than ever before, just new ways to show them and tabulate them.

 

I don't think anyone has suggested there are more blown calls than before.

 

Technology does make the bad calls more obvious, that's a fact. And it makes people wonder why, if it can be done by technology, we don't eliminate the bad calls?

 

And the technological tabulations have confirmed things like the fact that Laz Diaz is one of the very worst at calling balls and strikes. Which makes people wonder why he was doing so in the ALCS.

[Bellhorn04]

I think that you made some great points here. Technology of course and rightfully so is here to stay. i do think that overdosing on it doesn't improve one's quality of life though. When i go to the golf course (which is most days) the telephone does not go with me.

 

Yeah, but do you or your golf buddies use technological aids to get your distance to the flag now?

[notin]

Fury? really?

 

To be fair, he was quoting Max….

[cp176]

To be fair, he was quoting Max….

 

I've read through the posts and if fury is being expressed we actually are living in a kinder, gentler world.

[cp176]

Yeah, but do you or your golf buddies use technological aids to get your distance to the flag now?

 

 

only for speed of play purposes - lol Why do you always have to do stuff like this anyway? lol stop raining on my parade.

[Bellhorn04]

Sorry cp, but having played some golf, I know there's nobody who likes their technological upgrades more than golfers!

[cp176]

Sorry cp, but having played some golf, I know there's nobody who likes their technological upgrades more than golfers!

 

to date though i have found no club that allows me to gain back any of the yardage i have lost in just the last two years - come on technology.

[moonslav59]

Well it is clear to see that all 5,6 or maybe 7 of you have made up your minds about how much more beneficial to the game it would be to have robots calling the balls and strikes. Hope you don't mind someone disagreeing with you. There have been many changes made to the game which I have had no problem with at all but personally I do not think that this move would make the game particularly interesting for me to watch. Hey look before you pile on - I don't care for the way basketball is played these days and it is a game that I know a little about. What can I say- I wish that the 3 point line had never been created. Losing me or the few others who share my opinion obviously won't hurt the game.

 

With all due respect, how is an invisible earpiece make the game less interesting to you?

 

Will it really bother you enough to enjoy the game less, knowing the ump is being told to make the correct and consistent call every time?

 

Is part of your enjoyment of the game the suspense in knowing if the ump will make the right or wrong call?

 

I'm not trying to be a prick, here. I honestly want to understand how this change seems to get so much under some fans' skin. (And, yes, at least one with "fury." His choice of wording- not mine.)

[cp176]

With all due respect, how is an invisible earpiece make the game less interesting to you?

 

Will it really bother you enough to enjoy the game less, knowing the ump is being told to make the correct and consistent call every time?

 

Is part of your enjoyment of the game the suspense in knowing if the ump will make the right or wrong call?

 

I'm not trying to be a prick, here. I honestly want to understand how this change seems to get so much under some fans' skin. (And, yes, at least one with "fury." His choice of wording- not mine.)

 

Yes - the more automation that continues to be introduced into the game will cause me to continue to lose interest. i don't care where they put the earpiece, there really is something about this that in my mind is an attempt to sterilize a pretty good game that doesn't need much help. The human element is very important to me. It is an imperfect game because humans are involved. Look I'm not trying to get into any argument with you or once again a few others on the site. I can't compete with any of you in that regard. I'm just one voice and I think that I have expressed how I feel about the issue. Don't forget - I'm one of those guys that still believes in momentum, the home field advantage, clutch athletes in general. I appreciate what the data and technology has brought to the game but it isn't why I watch and it does nothing to add to my personal enjoyment of it. I've been able to live with the mistakes that I have had to live through in my coaching and viewing career and actually many of them have given me stories to tell years after they happened. Hey - I'm an old athlete and coach I guess now. I need those stories. I don't think that my feelings are actually all that out of step with regard to the viewing public.

[moonslav59]

Yes - the more automation that continues to be introduced into the game will cause me to continue to lose interest. i don't care where they put the earpiece, there really is something about this that in my mind is an attempt to sterilize a pretty good game that doesn't need much help. The human element is very important to me. It is an imperfect game because humans are involved. Look I'm not trying to get into any argument with you or once again a few others on the site. I can't compete with any of you in that regard. I'm just one voice and I think that I have expressed how I feel about the issue. Don't forget - I'm one of those guys that still believes in momentum, the home field advantage, clutch athletes in general. I appreciate what the data and technology has brought to the game but it isn't why I watch and it does nothing to add to my personal enjoyment of it. I've been able to live with the mistakes that I have had to live through in my coaching and viewing career and actually many of them have given me stories to tell years after they happened. Hey - I'm an old athlete and coach I guess now. I need those stories. I don't think that my feelings are actually all that out of step with regard to the viewing public.

 

Thank you for the thoughtful response, and I'm not trying to put down those against robo ump strikes & balls calls. I'm just trying to understand what is so upsetting, and your response helped me to do that.

 

Personally, since I don't think it will ne noticeable, I'm thinking over time, it won't be a big deal to those against it, but I'm not trying to say it doesn't or won't ever matter.

 

Changes like the DH, 3 batter rule, the extra inning nonsense, and the 7 inning DH were much more noticeable and impactful, IMO.

 

I don't see this any sort of gateway drug or opening of the door to complete automation. I'd even trade this for eliminating some of the long delays for instant replays over some other calls. That is clearly a change to the game- forcing fans to wait for the replay decision.

[Bellhorn04]

I'd even trade this for eliminating some of the long delays for instant replays over some other calls. That is clearly a change to the game- forcing fans to wait for the replay decision.

 

Well, there is a tradeoff-now we don't have to wait for the Earl Weaver/Lou Piniella style tantrums to play out.

[jad]

Well it is clear to see that all 5,6 or maybe 7 of you have made up your minds about how much more beneficial to the game it would be to have robots calling the balls and strikes. Hope you don't mind someone disagreeing with you. There have been many changes made to the game which I have had no problem with at all but personally I do not think that this move would make the game particularly interesting for me to watch. Hey look before you pile on - I don't care for the way basketball is played these days and it is a game that I know a little about. What can I say- I wish that the 3 point line had never been created. Losing me or the few others who share my opinion obviously won't hurt the game.

 

I don't think you would disagree with this, but your associating automated ball/strike calls with the introduction of the 3-pt line in basketball shows that your objection to 'robot umps' has nothing whatsoever to do with technology or 'the human element' in sports. It's all about keeping the game 'the way it was' when we were kids. But alas (or perhaps Thank God!) NOTHING is the way it was when we were kids. Nor is 'the way it was when we were kids' much like 'the way it was when when our parents or grandparents were kids'.

[moonslav59]

Well, there is a tradeoff-now we don't have to wait for the Earl Weaver/Lou Piniella style tantrums to play out.

 

Now, that was entertainment!

 

If bringing that back was the point being made by anti-robo strikes and ball calls crowd, I'd have no comeback.

[dgalehouse]

Well, there is a tradeoff-now we don't have to wait for the Earl Weaver/Lou Piniella style tantrums to play out.

 

My feeling is that baseball is just a sport , a game , a diversion , entertainment. A little controversy, a bad strike call , " kill the ump " , an Earl Weaver rant , etc. are all part of the fun. Sometimes, we remember them more than the game itself. There is no real urgency to get everything right. Folks take things too seriously. Personally, I don't care about robot umps . Having them will not ruin the game for me. But I would just as soon keep the robots out of baseball. They are not needed.

[moonslav59]

My feeling is that baseball is just a sport , a game , a diversion , entertainment. A little controversy, a bad strike call , " kill the ump " , an Earl Weaver rant , etc. are all part of the fun. Sometimes, we remember them more than the game itself. There is no real urgency to get everything right. Folks take things too seriously. Personally, I don't care about robot umps . Having them will not ruin the game for me. But I would just as soon keep the robots out of baseball. They are not needed.

 

We'll never get everything right, but many would like to see the arc heading in the right direction.

[Bellhorn04]

My feeling is that baseball is just a sport , a game , a diversion , entertainment. A little controversy, a bad strike call , " kill the ump " , an Earl Weaver rant , etc. are all part of the fun. Sometimes, we remember them more than the game itself. There is no real urgency to get everything right. Folks take things too seriously. Personally, I don't care about robot umps . Having them will not ruin the game for me. But I would just as soon keep the robots out of baseball. They are not needed.

 

I've noticed that you take winning very seriously, though. You chide other posters for saying things like "it was a successful season even though we didn't win it all," saying that's a loser's attitude or whatever.

 

I guess it's all a matter of personal perspectives.

[cp176]

Thank you for the thoughtful response, and I'm not trying to put down those against robo ump strikes & balls calls. I'm just trying to understand what is so upsetting, and your response helped me to do that.

 

Personally, since I don't think it will ne noticeable, I'm thinking over time, it won't be a big deal to those against it, but I'm not trying to say it doesn't or won't ever matter.

 

Changes like the DH, 3 batter rule, the extra inning nonsense, and the 7 inning DH were much more noticeable and impactful, IMO.

 

I don't see this any sort of gateway drug or opening of the door to complete automation. I'd even trade this for eliminating some of the long delays for instant replays over some other calls. That is clearly a change to the game- forcing fans to wait for the replay decision.

 

it's all good and truth be told i don't like many of the recent changes to the game that have been made either.

[Bellhorn04]

I really don't believe that most fans enjoy outcomes that seem tainted by bad calls.

 

Just imagine if the umps didn't get the call right on the A-Rod slap play, and the Yankees ended up winning that game. Fortunately that was one time they were able to fix the call without replay. Those umps did an amazing job. But it could have easily gone the other way.