The sooner we get an automated strike zone, the better

[shysocks]

Since that 8th inning apocalypse probably doesn't happen if Carroll's first hitter is correctly called out on strikes, I figured now was as good a time as any to make this thread.

 

I have been rapidly losing patience with the umpiring behind home plate this season and it boiled over tonight. Is it any worse this year than in years prior? Probably not, but it has never been more obvious that umps are bad at their jobs, with Pitch Trax and browser apps like Gameday shoving every poor call in our face. Why is this acceptable? We watch every game and just accept that this ump's zone is six inches wider tonight except for when it's not and that's fine because the human element. Somebody viewing their first ever baseball game would see one inning with Pitch Trax on the side of the screen and think it is abjectly ridiculous that we allow this. What if NFL broadcasts just had a permanent tally of missed holding calls in the corner?

 

And I get it! It's a hard job to call balls and strikes! That's why we should use the technology we have to make sure it's done perfectly. The umps can still keep their jobs, so there's no need to rile up the union. We still need guys making calls at the bases, judging check swings, and incorrectly applying new tag and slide rules.

 

It will cause disruption. Players will be slow to get accustomed because they are used to the incorrect way we have done things for a century, but it will be an improvement and eventually we will all wonder how we ever did it the old way. Let's just please use the tools we have already. It will make the sport better.

 

Can anyone offer a compelling reason that MLB shouldn't make this change? I'm talking beyond the logistics; I know the umps are resistant to the idea.

 

(And in anticipation of such comments, no, I am not blaming this loss on the umpire, it was just the catalyst for me to post)

[soxforlife05]

There is no compelling reason other than they are trying to preserve the spirit of the game. I think it would shift things back in the hitters favor some because inconsistent strike zones tend to stagnate offense.

 

I'm in favor of making the change as well.

[reiks12]

If they are going to use replay to get the calls right then there should be an automated strike zone.

[Texsox]

How do you envision this being implemented? A light goes on somewhere? Everyone turns to the scoreboard? Is the technology really that accurate? We accept that it is because it gives us this really nice graphic. I wonder just how accurate it truly is.

 

I would have a lot more questions before being able to get 100% behind the idea. But I do think it is something that should be seriously looked at. Especially if it speeds up play.

[GreenSox]

Pitch framing catchers would object to this idea.

The irony is that officials are most ingrained into baseball versus all of the sports. And yet baseball umpires would be the easiest officials to completely replace with automated technology. The only issues would be plays that would require human review.

[Texsox]

Pitch framing catchers would object to this idea.

The irony is that officials are most ingrained into baseball versus all of the sports. And yet baseball umpires would be the easiest officials to completely replace with automated technology. The only issues would be plays that would require human review.

 

I'm interested in how you came to that conclusion.

[SCCWS]

Pitch framing catchers would object to this idea.

The irony is that officials are most ingrained into baseball versus all of the sports. And yet baseball umpires would be the easiest officials to completely replace with automated technology. The only issues would be plays that would require human review.

 

Why have any umpires??? Have cameras covering every base as well as the complete stadium and let it be totally umpired remotely.

 

[Chisoxfn]

Yes...the first batter should have been out...doesn't justify giving up 5 runs. Last night the Sox played 2014 baseball. They were sloppy and whenever they had a chance to make a play defensively or pitch passed an issue, they failed. Bottom line, there were countless times with Rodon on the bump where the defense could have made a play and didn't and it led to runs and than in the 8th again that was the case (with Jackson...although it was still a rocket of Desmond's bat).

 

I still like umps and I actually hate replay in regular season baseball.

[Black_Jack29]

One of the things that I like about baseball is the fact that it hasn't changed much in the past 100 years. Records and history are revered. Consequently, PED use is arguably frowned upon more in baseball than any other sport. Natural grass is preferred over synthetic turf. Open-air stadiums are preferred over domed stadiums. Old-school uniforms are preferred over the ugly "modern" uniforms that were popular in the '80s. Wooden bats are still used (for the pitchers' safety, I know, but it still adds to the retro feel of the game). MLB held off on using instant replay for much longer than other sports (and I still don't like it).

 

So, despite last night, I'm all for umpires calling balls and strikes. For better or worse, I enjoy the human element of the game, even when the incorrect call is made, and I would miss the interaction between umps, players, and coaches. In any other sport, I'd be fine with using technology to ensure that the right call is made each and every time. Just not baseball.

 

As for last night, I place the blame on Carroll and Albers. They sucked and lost the game for us.

 

[Dick Allen]

I think it should be one of 2 things, either get technology to call balls and strikes or make the best balls and strikes umpires permanent home plate umpires. Let the Laz Diazes of the world work the bases.

 

Now with replay, balls and strikes is the biggest umpire issue. Everything else can be reviewed.

 

If they aren't going to do anything about it, they probably should ban pitch trax. All it does is makes the umpires look bad. And these are the best in the world. It shows just how tough of a job it is.

Edited May 11, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Texsox]

If they aren't going to do anything about it, they probably should ban pitch trax. All it does is makes the umpires look bad. And these are the best in the world. It shows just how tough of a job it is.

 

Great point. These are the best in the world.

 

Again, does anyone have evidence how reliable and accurate pitch trax is?

[Special K]

I've been calling for an automated strike zone for at least 10 years now. Utterly ridiculous not to have one. No matter how hard they try, the umps cannot (nor should they be expected) have an equal strike zone on every pitch. They're going to make mistakes. Moreover, there is often a bias (whether umps do it intentionally or subconsciously) - some umps don't like certain players, some pitchers have a bigger strike zone if they're a star (the same goes for hitters), and some umps might just get caught up in the heat of the game.

 

There's no place in the game for any of this. The strike zone should be equal for all players, and the game cannot be played fairly without one. Otherwise, one team is literally at a disadvantage.

[Dick Allen]

Great point. These are the best in the world.

 

Again, does anyone have evidence how reliable and accurate pitch trax is?

That is a good point. The one that was on Fox or TBS last year in the playoffs was either way off, or the umpires had the same issues every game. The problem is, we are talking inches. One or 2 inches makes all the difference in the world, and if you aren't working the edges of the plate, you wind up being an ex pitcher. Almost impossible to get them all right, but obviously some are much better and consistent than others. That's why I think if they aren't going to go robotic, they should make the best balls and strikes umpires just balls and strikes umpires.

[OmarComing25]

It can't come soon enough, differing strike zones is probably my least favorite part of the game. I also hate that pitch framing is a thing, it's baseball's version of flopping.

[southsider2k5]

If automated umpires are anything like instant replay, forget it. They get multiple angles, still miss calls, and take up too much time doing it.

[bighurt574]

Any automated system would have to take into account the height of the batter, right? Probably not terribly difficult, but does the current technology do that?

[Chisoxfn]

That is a good point. The one that was on Fox or TBS last year in the playoffs was either way off, or the umpires had the same issues every game. The problem is, we are talking inches. One or 2 inches makes all the difference in the world, and if you aren't working the edges of the plate, you wind up being an ex pitcher. Almost impossible to get them all right, but obviously some are much better and consistent than others. That's why I think if they aren't going to go robotic, they should make the best balls and strikes umpires just balls and strikes umpires.

I think the problem the notion of making the balls and strikes umps, just the balls and strikes umps is the physical toll it would take to be behind the plate every single game umping (hard enough for a professional athlete like a catcher, let alone an ump).

[bmags]

i agree with shysocks. I'm tired of it, needs to end.

[shysocks]

How do you envision this being implemented? A light goes on somewhere? Everyone turns to the scoreboard? Is the technology really that accurate? We accept that it is because it gives us this really nice graphic. I wonder just how accurate it truly is.

 

I would have a lot more questions before being able to get 100% behind the idea. But I do think it is something that should be seriously looked at. Especially if it speeds up play.

You could do it almost seamlessly. Give the home plate ump a device that vibrates on a strike and an earpiece with a line to the control room in NY in case the buzzer stops working, and have him vocalize balls and strikes just like he does now. That's the only thing that would have to be different, except you'd get fewer arguments from players and managers.

 

As for your questions about accuracy, before looking anything up, I have a feeling that PITCHf/x (which is the system that lends its information to broadcasts) is far more accurate than umpires. The complaints about the TBS strike zone from last year's playoffs that DA brings up were more a cause of the size of the box they displayed than some bias in the measurements, if I remember right.

 

This is an old study on the system's accuracy. There's a lot of complex stuff in there that I don't really understand. It does state that the error fluctuates by ballpark and game-to-game, but the takeaway is this.

 

Based upon the level of accuracy in PITCHf/x plate locations and our ability to apply corrections to the errors in these locations, what can we conclude? Most of the errors are less than an inch or two and thus probably of little effect on most batter and pitcher measurements. Errors in plate location measurements have a corresponding effect on the spin deflection measurements for pitchers, but again, errors of less than an inch or two are fairly small when most pitch clusters are five inches or more apart in the spin deflection space. One arena where the implications of PITCHf/x plate location accuracy are larger is in umpire evaluation. Errors of an inch or two are sizable when grading umpire performance, and corrected location data would be useful in that application.

 

I do not know if the system has undergone improvement since that study was published before the 2011 season, but I have to imagine it has, and if MLB was going to make a huge leap and use PITCHf/x as its official ump, there would be enormous pressure to make sure it is perfect.

 

So, despite last night, I'm all for umpires calling balls and strikes. For better or worse, I enjoy the human element of the game, even when the incorrect call is made, and I would miss the interaction between umps, players, and coaches. In any other sport, I'd be fine with using technology to ensure that the right call is made each and every time. Just not baseball.

I can see why people feel this way, but man, I just can't get behind it. I couldn't disagree more. There are certain baseballisms that I'm in love with, like different ballpark dimensions, but this unpredictable strike zone from night to night is a detriment. It's not good that a game can hinge on the whims of an official. We have the capability to do it better, so let's do it.

 

If they aren't going to do anything about it, they probably should ban pitch trax. All it does is makes the umpires look bad. And these are the best in the world. It shows just how tough of a job it is.

I agree, I don't think it does MLB any good. Keep using it to evaluate umps privately, but the fans don't need to see it. It just makes us mad and gives us excuses. As I said in the OP, it's analogous to other sports keeping a box in the corner that just says "Referee mistakes this game: 14."

 

Any automated system would have to take into account the height of the batter, right? Probably not terribly difficult, but does the current technology do that?

PITCHf/x does account for batter height.

 

 

[Kyyle23]

First thing that will happen is the Twins will be accused of hacking/changing the strikezone for the opposing pitchers starting around the 7th inning

[hogan873]

The introduction of instant replay has either made the umpires lazy or they were just not that good to begin with. I'm not sure of the percentage of times calls are overturned, but it's too high.

 

I'm not sure about an automated strike zone, but it has seemed that the strikes zones have gotten bad. If you watch a game with a pitch tracker, you can see a lot of pitches not being called correctly. It would be okay if the calls were consistent, but they're not. You see the same pitch called a ball and a strike a lot, especially the close ones.

 

Maybe it's something they could test in spring training one year, like football did with the extra points.

[ChiSoxFanMike]

I've always wondered if there's some way that an umpire could have a headset inside of his mask where an unbiased, computerized robot gives him the correct call within a split second of the pitch crossing home plate.

Edited May 11, 2016 by ChiSoxFanMike

[Princess Dye]

No blaming the umps last night, really. We deserved to lose that one a few times and we probably deserved to lose the night before too.

 

1-1 is about right after all the baseball i watched during the last 48 hours

Edited May 11, 2016 by Jose Paniagua

[chw42]

 

Just gonna leave this here.

[Texsox]

The introduction of instant replay has either made the umpires lazy or they were just not that good to begin with. I'm not sure of the percentage of times calls are overturned, but it's too high.

 

I'm not sure about an automated strike zone, but it has seemed that the strikes zones have gotten bad. If you watch a game with a pitch tracker, you can see a lot of pitches not being called correctly. It would be okay if the calls were consistent, but they're not. You see the same pitch called a ball and a strike a lot, especially the close ones.

 

Maybe it's something they could test in spring training one year, like football did with the extra points.

 

Based on the really small number of calls that are even questioned, including very close plays, I would say it proves the umps are very good. If one in a few hundred gets questioned, that's very good even if it gets overruled.

 

When they are talking an inch off the plate I wonder how far off the plate the graphic shows. We are being fed an enhanced view for entertainment. I wonder how exact they are actually able to detect.