Elktonnick

Why

It is.

Like I said no one cares what you have to say but you will continue to post your thousands of meaningless posts for every one anyone else posts..

No one really cares about what you think just like no one cares about what I think other than my wife and grandchildren. The point is that if pitchers believe robo ump will adversely affect their ability to throw breaking balls then the union may object and the commissioner may come to his senses.

The article you cite was written in 2018. The following is more recent: "In 2019, the robo-ump followed the rulebook strike zone to the letter. Players complained: it was too high, too narrow, and things got weird around the edges. M.L.B. adjusted the parameters in 2021. A three-dimensional zone was jettisoned for a two-dimensional one. New Yorker August 23, 3021"

That happens in every sport and has been going on since the first games had referees. I can remember the first time I was exposed to this. I attended a basketball clinic when I was very young run by Frank Ramsey of the Boston Celtics. He explained how to draw fouls and how to keep one eye on where the referee was standing. BTW you might want to do a little more research on how the robo ump is actually functioning. Instead of using a three dimension strike zone using the volume of the entire plate, the current system uses a two dimensional box based on the front line of the plate. So for example an Ephos pitch which enters the dimension of the plate above the strike zone and crosses the plate exiting below the strike zone is not called a strike although technically it is. Players who are playing games using the system claim it misses many curve balls and cutters. It appears that the system will probably adversely pitchers with especially sharp breaking pitches. For the record while the commissioner is a strong advocate of the robo ump Joe Torre among others is not.

They do.

You are and you do.

Now that is rich you who posts every random thought you have ever had calls something silly.

Easy pass was first created in the mid 80s. I don't think easy pass made it to Canada until 20 years later. So unless you got one down here you did not get one of the ones that first came out.

That is what they said about our systems too.

The first remotes came out in 1956.and drove dogs crazy. How old were you in 1956?

I gather you have never been involved in implementing a new computer system. I have done five, two with the State Dept and three with the State of Maryland. They were all beset with cost over runs and operational delays The last one had to be scrapped and rebid at a cost of Sixty Million.. It took over 5 years to get that one up and running.

Actually it did. The first remotes were acoustical and our not only changed channels but could open our neighbors garage door.

Easy passes took years to implement.

No technological innovations are always introduced seamlessly without customers ever noticing their implementation just ask anyone who has introduced any such systems into their operations. That is like saying I am from the gov't and I am here to help.

What makes you think that wouldn't happen with Robo umps. Besides even in the circumstance you describe, it adds mere seconds to game. In 1940 the average major league lasted 2 hours. Now it is over three. The additional time was not caused by players questioning balls and strikes. I suspect the player's union and the umpires union will all find that Robo umpires aren't in their interests. Moreover I suspect ownership will eventually decide that Robo umps just are not in their financial interests either. If you are an owner you are not selling an antiseptic sport.

I do not think Robo umps will speed up the game because the act of calling balls and strikes is not the cause of today's slow game. The amount of time between pitches and the number of pitching changes are the main culprits in that regard. Moreover the relative modern strategy of driving up pitch counts also is a factor.

You haven 't proven anything but merely asserted your opinion. Unless and until MLB starts the process of automating officiating no one will no its ultimate effect. All you have is your conjecture.

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

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.

The only dumb idea is Robo umps

Yes the umpires add nothing to the color of the game. Since the dawn the game no one has every had any interest in anything the umpires have had to say about the games. So let us do away with all umpires and automate the entire officiating of all games.

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.

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