Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

Home Plate Umps Should Be Replaced by Robots


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Members_Only_76 said:

 

 

how can you tell from that angle where the ball was when it was at the height of the bottom of the zone? The ball could be a foot in front of the plate and then is lower than that when it starts to cross the front of the plate.

 

need the side angle or "3D" K zone :D

 

 

I'm just saying, the pitch was a sinker and the dot ended up being almost right where the ball hit the catcher's mitt. And we know for sure the catcher's mitt was behind the plate, not on top of it.

I think if you compared the amount of times hitters complain about the correct ball/strike call to the amount of times an ump actually misses one, the latter would probably be less than 1% of the former. I mean I've seen guys complain about called strikes that are basically right down the middle, center/center.

Edited by Fiveohnine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, mudrummer said:

How would you feel if you went to a restaurant and they got your order right 95% of the time. Probably be pretty upset the other 5% right?? Multiply that by $8MM and I think it’s easy to see why front offices would be concerned. 

Personally, I think restaurants would be a lot more exciting if there's a 5% chance the food contains cyanide. Would add to the experience.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Fiveohnine said:

I'm just saying, the pitch was a sinker and the dot ended up being almost right where the ball hit the catcher's mitt. And we know for sure the catcher's mitt was behind the plate, not on top of it.

I think if you compared the amount of times hitters complain about the correct ball/strike call to the amount of times an ump actually misses one, the latter would probably be less than 1% of the former. I mean I've seen guys complain about called strikes that are basically right down the middle, center/center.

 

Oh for sure, both pitchers and hitters want their call (and it's the wrong call sometimes)

 

For me it boils down to getting the more obvious calls right so it doesn't negatively impact the outcome of the games, and viewing experience of the games. 

 

It's a complete turn off to see a batter get a horrible strike 3 called that they couldn't even reach with the bat if they tried, especially at a critical moment and vice versa to see a pitcher have to continue an AB when he already struck a guy out (again especially at critical moments).  That's not entertaining, at all. 

 

And again, umps still have the control. I'm not for taking it away from umps. Just give them the earpiece or buzzer and let them do with it what they may, and go from there, see how it works. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

Personally, I think restaurants would be a lot more exciting if there's a 5% chance the food contains cyanide. Would add to the experience.

This thread has become a true treasure trove of brilliant ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, knifeparty said:

Just came over from the Wives/Girlfriends should be replaced by robots thread!  You would be shocked at how similar the bitching and moaning is on the 2 topics. 

I can't say Joe West has ever reminded me of my wife, but if it makes you think of yours then I wish the both of you continued wedded bliss.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, knifeparty said:

Just came over from the Wives/Girlfriends should be replaced by robots thread!  You would be shocked at how similar the bitching and moaning is on the 2 topics. 

“The Stepford Umpires”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Members_Only_76 said:

 

and this is a ball 

 

 

Is there an overhead shot? Because it looks like it could have been a ball. It seem like it is outside.
The strike zone is not there where they placed the circle. That is where the catcher caught the ball. Totally wrong. Catcher's mitt is like 3 feet from the front of the plate.

And here is where it seems like the ball is about in line with the front of the plate.
pitch2.jpg.ebb699ed1fc198c807b1efe963633b28.jpg

But even if the pitch actually catches the outside of the zone, it is very hard to call, because the pitcher crossed up the cathcer as well as the umpire. And the umpire has to position himself on the inside part of the plate.
So if that was a strike, blame the pitcher. The ump might or might not have missed that call, but the pitcher effed it up completely. Yet somehow no one blames the pitcher.
It must be more of a cultural thing than logical.

Edited by JCD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, JCD said:

Is there an overhead shot? Because it looks like it could have been a ball. It seem like it is outside.
The strike zone is not there where they placed the circle. That is where the catcher caught the ball. Totally wrong. Catcher's mitt is like 3 feet from the front of the plate.

And here is where it seems like the ball is about in line with the front of the plate.
pitch2.jpg.ebb699ed1fc198c807b1efe963633b28.jpg

But even if the pitch actually catches the outside of the zone, it is very hard to call, because the pitcher crossed up the cathcer as well as the umpire. And the umpire has to position himself on the inside part of the plate.
So if that was a strike, blame the pitcher. The ump might or might not have missed that call, but the pitcher effed it up completely. Yet somehow no one blames the pitcher.
It must be more of a cultural thing than logical.

I was thinking about this as well. How umps often miss blatant strike calls because the pitcher missed his intended location. In my opinion, a strike is a strike. The plate shouldn't magically shrink in size based on where the catcher sets up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, collucho said:

I was thinking about this as well. How umps often miss blatant strike calls because the pitcher missed his intended location. In my opinion, a strike is a strike. The plate shouldn't magically shrink in size based on where the catcher sets up.

The strike zone doesn't shrink. In this regard. It is human perception that has a hard time to deal with this problem. You mentioned the word magically, and actually that is not far from the truth. Magicians use the same human shortcoming to decieve the audience. Naturally the umpire focuses on the area where the catcher expects the pitch, and has no time to adjust properly, so borderline pitches can be missed because of this.
This is the one area where a computerized strike zone could help. On the inside and on the outside calls.

And just to throw it out there, a pitch that is right in the middle of the strike zone can be called a ball by the umpire.
It is because it is taught that every pitch is a ball until it is a strike. So the umpire has to see tha ball enter the strike zone. But if the catcher stands up while receiving the pitch to prepare to throw out the runner attempting to steal a base, and blocks the view of the umpire, it is a ball.
If the catcher doesn't know this, it is his fault.

Edited by JCD
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, JCD said:

The strike zone doesn't shrink. In this regard. It is human perception that has a hard time to deal with this problem. You mentioned the word magically, and actually that is not far from the truth. Magicians use the same human shortcoming to decieve the audience. Naturally the umpire focuses on the area where the catcher expects the pitch, and has no time to adjust properly, so borderline pitches can be missed because of this.
This is the one area where a computerized strike zone could help. On the inside and on the outside calls.

And just to throw it out there, a pitch that is right in the middle of the strike zone can be called a ball by the umpire.
It is because it is taught that every pitch is a ball until it is a strike. So the umpire has to see tha ball enter the strike zone. But if the catcher stands up while receiving the pitch to prepare to throw out the runner attempting to steal a base, and blocks the view of the umpire, it is a ball.
If the catcher doesn't know this, it is his fault.

This is a great argument in favor of robots calling the pitches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
2 hours ago, collucho said:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CQr_qbGAeNi/?utm_medium=copy_link

Angel Hernandez with the strike three call 6 inches off the plate to the Giants #3 batter (Buster Posey) in a huge rivalry game.

Why is it that he still has a job? Everyone within MLB Baseball circles, know his zone is terrible, yet they just keep sticking him back there to judge balls and strikes for players getting paid millions of dollars to know the strike zone.  It’s unacceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That link doesn't show the pitch. But I looked it up on YouTube and it was another case of the computer being even MORE wrong than the ump. I mean yeah it looked like it was probably a ball. But it wasn't "6 inches" off the plate. 

 The dot was where the catcher caught the ball outside. Not where the ball was at the time it reached the plate (the pitch was breaking away from the hitter). The actual pitch was MUCH closer to the plate than where the dot was placed on the 2D image. 

Edited by Fiveohnine
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, StartYourStuds said:

Why is it that he still has a job? Everyone within MLB Baseball circles, know his zone is terrible, yet they just keep sticking him back there to judge balls and strikes for players getting paid millions of dollars to know the strike zone.  It’s unacceptable.

That wasn't his only bad call in that game, either.  It's one  thing if you establish a zone and stick to it (even if they aren't necessarily balls or strikes) but he is all over the place and not consistent with his zone.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ToO_BaD said:

 It's one thing if you establish a zone and stick to it (even if they aren't necessarily balls or strikes) .  

As long as they do this, I don't have a problem with it...  Being consistent throughout the game...  Hernandez definitely does not do that...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Fiveohnine said:

That link doesn't show the pitch. But I looked it up on YouTube and it was another case of the computer being even MORE wrong than the ump. I mean yeah it looked like it was probably a ball. But it wasn't "6 inches" off the plate. 

 The dot was where the catcher caught the ball outside. Not where the ball was at the time it reached the plate (the pitch was breaking away from the hitter). The actual pitch was MUCH closer to the plate than where the dot was placed on the 2D image. 

This is the huge problem with the K-Zone on screen all the time...  The catcher catches the ball and that is where it shows on the screen as the pitch was and that is incorrect...  The pitch is called when it gets to the plate, not where the catcher catches it and therefore a lot of people think it is a bad call...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, posty said:

As long as they do this, I don't have a problem with it...  Being consistent throughout the game...  Hernandez definitely does not do that...

Agree 100%.  If you know a guy calls wider corners, fine.  If he is a low ball guy, belt-high guy - so be it.  All that I ask for is consistency lol.  And as the poster stated above, it is no secret how bad that guy is.  I can't fathom how he still has a job at this level.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, collucho said:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CQr_qbGAeNi/?utm_medium=copy_link

Angel Hernandez with the strike three call 6 inches off the plate to the Giants #3 batter (Buster Posey) in a huge rivalry game.

6 inches my a..
Missed the zone by the size of the ball. That is less than half of that. Here is where the ball is about in line with the strike zone.

x.jpg.4c6fb4ee67d505c1acb06e0ff4ce5045.jpg

Just watch the circle on the video. It is exacly where the catcher has the ball.
What they show on screen where the pitch is incorrect! Every single time.
Where the catcher catches the ball is not in line with the strike zone.


Judging pitches and criticizing peope based on that, is worse than making a bad call.
And people want to replace people with machines that think the strike zone is in line with the catcher's mitt?

Edited by JCD
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, JCD said:

6 inches my a..
Missed the zone by the size of the ball. That is less than half of that. Here is where the ball is about in line with the strike zone.

x.jpg.4c6fb4ee67d505c1acb06e0ff4ce5045.jpg

Just watch the circle on the video. It is exacly where the catcher has the ball.
What they show on screen where the pitch is incorrect! Every single time.
Where the catcher catches the ball is not in line with the strike zone.


Judging pitches and criticizing peope based on that, is worse than making a bad call.
And people want to replace people with machines that think the strike zone is in line with the catcher's mitt?

Now I am not a fan of Hernandez, but look where he is set up...  He is set up on the inside corner, where almost all umps set up...  Now looking over to the right to see the ball, I am pretty sure that from that angle, it will look like the ball catches the corner...

But you are correct, I would venture to guess that a huge majority believe it is where the catcher catches the ball if it is a strike or not...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, JCD said:

6 inches my a..
Missed the zone by the size of the ball. That is less than half of that. Here is where the ball is about in line with the strike zone.

x.jpg.4c6fb4ee67d505c1acb06e0ff4ce5045.jpg

Just watch the circle on the video. It is exacly where the catcher has the ball.
What they show on screen where the pitch is incorrect! Every single time.
Where the catcher catches the ball is not in line with the strike zone.


Judging pitches and criticizing peope based on that, is worse than making a bad call.
And people want to replace people with machines that think the strike zone is in line with the catcher's mitt?

*complains about me complaining when its obviously not a strike regardless*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, JCD said:

And people want to replace people with machines that think the strike zone is in line with the catcher's mitt?

Wait, is that how you think an automated strike would work? I hope you realize that what you see on tv isn't the same technology that would be used to call balls and strikes. MLB does some utterly stupid ****, but LOL at thinking they would call balls and strikes in a 2D plane that's a couple feet behind the actual strike zone.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cs3 said:

Wait, is that how you think an automated strike would work? I hope you realize that what you see on tv isn't the same technology that would be used to call balls and strikes. MLB does some utterly stupid ****, but LOL at thinking they would call balls and strikes in a 2D plane that's a couple feet behind the actual strike zone.

Nothing of this is remotely resembles anything what I said.
Pretty sure it is you who has to realize some things first, before telling people what to realize, based on completely misunderstanding what was just said.
Looks like it needs to be explained.
So, people who cry to use machines are not the same as MLB doing something, even if you want to believe that other people who disagree with you think it is.
People who say technology is there based on what they see on tv, and take that as evidence, is not the same as MLB using that technology, even if you want to believe that other people who disagree with you think it is.
Clearly these things just appeared in your head, and just LOLd yourself I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...