|
|
Post by zeroposter on Jun 9, 2021 8:45:57 GMT -8
The last thread devolved into chaos, but I am still curious as to what posters are thinking on the subject. I have always been totally against the electronics--not so much any longer. Rather than attending games this season, I have been sitting on my dead rear watching televised, Beaver games. That pitch 4 inches off the outside corner shouldn't determine the course of a game even with it being called consistently for both teams. That aspect finally got to me this season. The home plate guy on Monday was a bad joke for both teams.
For college ball, the cost factor is major as I don't see the human umpires going away in the near future. They will still be present.
Anyway, opinions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jun 9, 2021 9:07:22 GMT -8
The last thread devolved into chaos, but I am still curious as to what posters are thinking on the subject. I have always been totally against the electronics--not so much any longer. Rather than attending games this season, I have been sitting on my dead rear watching televised, Beaver games. That pitch 4 inches off the outside corner shouldn't determine the course of a game even with it being called consistently for both teams. That aspect finally got to me this season. The home plate guy on Monday was a bad joke for both teams. For college ball, the cost factor is major as I don't see the human umpires going away in the near future. They will still be present. Anyway, opinions? Game is played by fallible humans and watched in the grandstands by fallible human spectators. I have no problem with it being officiated by the same. Keep the game analog. |
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Jun 9, 2021 10:03:46 GMT -8
100% against it. Things that have historically never been called strikes (curveballs that barely catch the bottom of the knees as the break onto the back of the plate, sliders that catch the back edge of the plate despite crossing the front of the plate outside) will now be called strikes. Fans at home will flip out because they don't look like any strikes they've ever seen before. Hitters will have to suddenly relearn what pitches to take and what pitches to swing at. I think in most cases an electronic strike zone will favor the pitchers and you'll actually have less offense. Full disclosure, I could do away with replay in all sports. Breaking things down to the smallest details (did the ball move a fraction of an inch upon impacting the ground on a catch by a wide receiver, did a basketball knocked out of an offensive player's hand on the sideline graze his pinky before going out of bounds, etc.) slows down the games, is imperceptible at full speed and creates this idea that officials are incompetent despite the fact that there's no way to make that call with 100% certainty ever. It just seems so funny that the sports world is so up in arms about fairness in these calls when it also loves to tell kids that sports teaches you that life isn't fair and that the best team doesn't always win and that there are no participation trophies. Part of what makes sports so great is that the controversial calls and plays create more interest in the sport. Nobody's going to tuning into the Jim Rome Show the next morning to discuss a 3rd strike called by a computer, but if you add a human element in there, it creates the interest that keeps us all engaged. Sure, it sucks when you're on the wrong end of that chaos....(as an Angels fan, I'm still upset about this moment from 16 years ago), but it undoubtedly made the game and the series more interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Jun 9, 2021 10:11:09 GMT -8
Against it....but as I said before, hold the umps to higher standards.....which I spose could be problematic....I have no idea what they are paid and what the demand is to be a D1 ump.....making it to the bigs is the motivation I assume? Throwing darts here, but get MLB to kick in money for these guys to clean it up??
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jun 9, 2021 12:16:48 GMT -8
Replay has clearly improved MLB. The plays, mostly at first base, are called correctly and quickly, eliminating the BS of a manager arguing with an umpire. It has eliminated the neighborhood play at second base. Tag plays/home runs/foul balls are called correctly. Controversy over the trap/catch has been eliminated.
(curveballs that barely catch the bottom of the knees as the break onto the back of the plate, sliders that catch the back edge of the plate despite crossing the front of the plate outside) will now be called strikes.
As they should be, because they are; "any part of the ball passes through [touches] any part of the strike zone" is a strike, by rulebook definition.
No problem with a consistent, automated strike zone. It is clearly not fair for umpires to consistently call strikes on pitches that are an inch or two off the plate, or to call balls on pitches that clearly catch part of the strike zone. Yet it happens all the time. I don't want the strike zone to change late in the game, but it often does, generally shrinking.
Saying batters want a "consistent" strike zone is a bunch of hooey. Batters want a "correct" strike zone, not a zone determined by what some random ump says it is that day. You will still need umpires to determine checked swings, foul tips, etc., so the plate umpire will still be involved in every pitch.
I'll take my chances an automated strike zone won't be hacked by some Dr. Evil-like character.
|
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Jun 9, 2021 13:36:06 GMT -8
I see it both ways, but I think it’s worth trying if it doesn't interfere with the flow of the game. Think of it: the moment a pitcher takes the mound he knows the edges of the zone. Every game. Every stadium. Batters, too.
If a classic, gentlemen’s sport like tennis can embrace technology at Wimbledon, baseball can, too, without losing what makes the game great.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jun 9, 2021 15:36:08 GMT -8
I see it both ways, but I think it’s worth trying if it doesn't interfere with the flow of the game. Think of it: the moment a pitcher takes the mound he knows the edges of the zone. Every game. Every stadium. Batters, too. If a classic, gentlemen’s sport like tennis can embrace technology at Wimbledon, baseball can, too, without losing what makes the game great. Tennis is a little different. The line calls are an essentially 2-dimensional model set once for each match . The strike zone is a 3-dimensional volume that varies in the vertical dimension for each batter. Seems like it'd be very technically challenging to get the vertical element precise for "high" and "low" pitches. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jun 9, 2021 15:38:46 GMT -8
100% against it. Things that have historically never been called strikes (curveballs that barely catch the bottom of the knees as the break onto the back of the plate, sliders that catch the back edge of the plate despite crossing the front of the plate outside) will now be called strikes. Fans at home will flip out because they don't look like any strikes they've ever seen before. Hitters will have to suddenly relearn what pitches to take and what pitches to swing at. I think in most cases an electronic strike zone will favor the pitchers and you'll actually have less offense. Full disclosure, I could do away with replay in all sports. Breaking things down to the smallest details (did the ball move a fraction of an inch upon impacting the ground on a catch by a wide receiver, did a basketball knocked out of an offensive player's hand on the sideline graze his pinky before going out of bounds, etc.) slows down the games, is imperceptible at full speed and creates this idea that officials are incompetent despite the fact that there's no way to make that call with 100% certainty ever. It just seems so funny that the sports world is so up in arms about fairness in these calls when it also loves to tell kids that sports teaches you that life isn't fair and that the best team doesn't always win and that there are no participation trophies. Part of what makes sports so great is that the controversial calls and plays create more interest in the sport. Nobody's going to tuning into the Jim Rome Show the next morning to discuss a 3rd strike called by a computer, but if you add a human element in there, it creates the interest that keeps us all engaged. Sure, it sucks when you're on the wrong end of that chaos....(as an Angels fan, I'm still upset about this moment from 16 years ago), but it undoubtedly made the game and the series more interesting. This is the one that really makes me angry: Just because perfect games are so improbable. To see a perfect game taking away by an atrocious call on the last play is just terrible to see. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Jun 9, 2021 16:06:36 GMT -8
I see it both ways, but I think it’s worth trying if it doesn't interfere with the flow of the game. Think of it: the moment a pitcher takes the mound he knows the edges of the zone. Every game. Every stadium. Batters, too. If a classic, gentlemen’s sport like tennis can embrace technology at Wimbledon, baseball can, too, without losing what makes the game great. Tennis is a little different. The line calls are an essentially 2-dimensional model set once for each match . The strike zone is a 3-dimensional volume that varies in the vertical dimension for each batter. Seems like it'd be very technically challenging to get the vertical element precise for "high" and "low" pitches. So my comment wasn't about the programming or engineering challenges of the implementing technology to make rulings realtime in games, but more how the culture of the sport, though lofty and proud, has accepted the use of modern devices to improve the calls. If tennis, the sport of kings, can move ahead, why not baseball? |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Jun 9, 2021 16:49:59 GMT -8
I see it both ways, but I think it’s worth trying if it doesn't interfere with the flow of the game. Think of it: the moment a pitcher takes the mound he knows the edges of the zone. Every game. Every stadium. Batters, too. If a classic, gentlemen’s sport like tennis can embrace technology at Wimbledon, baseball can, too, without losing what makes the game great. Tennis is a little different. The line calls are an essentially 2-dimensional model set once for each match . The strike zone is a 3-dimensional volume that varies in the vertical dimension for each batter. Seems like it'd be very technically challenging to get the vertical element precise for "high" and "low" pitches. This. I can see how technology sees the edges of the plate. How is the top and bottom of the zone determined? Does someone adjust a line for each batter? If someone can explain this to me in layperson's terms, I'd appreciate it. |
|
|
|
Post by osuft3 on Jun 9, 2021 16:52:00 GMT -8
F--- no. In the first place, a 5' 8" batter has a considerably different strike zone than one 6' 5". Will the batters have to inject sensors in their knees and armpits? Will switch hitters have to do both sides? Who will decide if a batter is barely brushed by a pitch, or whether he tried to avoid it or not? Can the first or third base umpire detect a close foul tip or play at home plate? How will Doug from Salem sit behind home plate and argue with a computer?
And then there's the cost. Most programs are on a shoe-string budget as it is and installing a system, and maintaining it would be a huge burden.
Leave umpiring alone. Besides, Sage would rise out of the grave and haunt the game forever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jun 9, 2021 17:09:57 GMT -8
F--- no. In the first place, a 5' 8" batter has a considerably different strike zone than one 6' 5". Will the batters have to inject sensors in their knees and armpits? Will switch hitters have to do both sides? Who will decide if a batter is barely brushed by a pitch, or whether he tried to avoid it or not? Can the first or third base umpire detect a close foul tip or play at home plate? How will Doug from Salem sit behind home plate and argue with a computer? And then there's the cost. Most programs are on a shoe-string budget as it is and installing a system, and maintaining it would be a huge burden. Leave umpiring alone. Besides, Sage would rise out of the grave and haunt the game forever. It's really pretty simple. You create an electronic strike zone profile for each player, using their customary stance. Before the game each batter's profile is loaded, in the correct batting order. When that batter comes to the plate, that profile is downloaded into the computer program's data bank. Next batter, new profile. Pinch-hitter, new profile downloaded with a mere click. Basic technology. Just like a camera reads your EZ pass at a tollbooth, like your credit card # gets read when you order something online, like the supermarket reads a barcode, like a computer reads your airline boarding pass from your phone, like so many things that happen every day in your life. We just landed a rover on Mars (again). We have cars that can drive themselves. I think we can handle this technology. In independent leagues that have adopted an automated strike zone, the home plate umpire does not go away. He still calls balls and strikes, after receiving an immediate vocal prompt from the computer. He's also still there for the very reasons you mention, as was noted in earlier posts on this thread. The point is getting it right on a far more consistent basis than currently happens. So Doug from Salem won't have to argue anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Jun 9, 2021 17:21:04 GMT -8
wilkyisdashiznit - Fox Sports had a pretty good half hour documentary about this, called “a perfect game.” Galarraga’s response to the whole ordeal is incredible.
|
|
|
|
Post by osuft3 on Jun 9, 2021 19:01:40 GMT -8
I admit that I'm a dinosaur--an analog guy in a techno world. Most of my post was a tongue-in-cheek rant, but my opinion remains the same. Leave baseball human.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jun 9, 2021 19:30:09 GMT -8
I admit that I'm a dinosaur--an analog guy in a techno world. Most of my post was a tongue-in-cheek rant, but my opinion remains the same. Leave baseball human. Then I guess we all have to stop complaining when fair balls are rules foul and when pitches in the opposite batter's box are called strikes in the biggest games of the season, the fallout of leaving baseball human when technology is available to help humans do even better. |
|
