Research has indicated that the more experienced the umps, the poorer performance in terms of Ball-Strike calls.  For example, the top 10 performing umps have an average of just under 3 years of experience and the bottom 10 performing umps had nearly 20 years of experience.

Is it time for Robo-Umps?  With all the technology used today to review plays, why not use Technological assisted aids for balls-strikes?


Read this article and let me know what you think..

Article

Absolutely for balls and strikes.

The technology is too simple, and it will nd so much bitching and moaning from both pitchers and hitters.

I'm absolutely against automating baseball. I am in favor of real reviews of umpires and doing away with the seniority rules that keep bad umpires around forever. What I'd like to see is the players union and managers heavily involved in selecting, hiring AND firing of umpires as needed and NOT some bean counter in NY's umpire union.. There's not a team in the league that would like to see Angel Hernandez behind the plate or anywhere else on the field again and there are several others that need to go.
Players are the people most effected by umpires, both good and bad. They know who calls a decent game and who's not worth spit and I doubt that there are 5 players from every team all in favor or who have made close relationships with any umpire making poor calls.
Look, there are plenty of solid umpires throughout the world. It's not AS IF umpires in general are all in tip top condition. In fact, many are so out of shape it's a wonder more don't just keel over and die on the field like opening day. Bring in younger umpires in better physical shape and I bet we'd see much better calls in baseball instead of most of these half blind, fat slobs currently calling games.

So I watched Votto strike out twice on called strikes Sunday that were balls. Then I watched Sunday night baseball and the same thing was going on.The error rate of calls can be fairly significant and at key times. Sometimes a strike in say the 3rd inning is called a ball later in the game, of course by the same ump. Then you run into make up calls, where the ump honestly doesn't want to influence the game by a bad previous call. But the game has been influenced, ie a pitcher might have needed more pitches to get out of an inning, and we know how teams follow pitch counts. I also see batters argue over strikes that really are strikes, and if the computer calls it, there would be no point in arguing that either. I'm as old school as it gets, but the bottom line is that the calls are right in who wins and loses. We already review calls at 1st base, HBP, tag plays, HR's, catches whether they are trapped or not, etc. Fans accept calls that are correct regardless of which side you root for.

Even umps have subconscious biases. Pete Rose used to get good calls because he had a reputation of having a great eye. If he took a close pitch with two strikes it was assumed to be a ball. I'd say Votto got the same treatment when he was hitting like an MVP.

The technology is just too easy now. In fact the league would probably save money with robo umps.

MLB is definitely heading in the direction of autocalling balls and strikes. Personally, I see no problem in getting the proper call. The minor league tests allowed the umpire to override the call. Next, what about a check swing being called a strike or ball? Not sure how you'd automate that when the pitch is a ball and the batter check swings. What about strike three foul tips? The point is you can't just call balls and strikes.

(08-13-2019, 01:50 PM)grampahol Wrote: I'm absolutely against automating baseball. I am in favor of real reviews of umpires and doing away with the seniority rules that keep bad umpires around forever. What I'd like to see is the players union and managers heavily involved in selecting, hiring AND firing of umpires as needed and NOT some bean counter in NY's umpire union.. There's not a team in the league that would like to see Angel Hernandez behind the plate or anywhere else on the field again and there are several others that need to go.
Players are the people most effected by umpires, both good and bad. They know who calls a decent game and who's not worth spit and I doubt that there are 5 players from every team all in favor or who have made close relationships with any umpire making poor calls.
Look, there are plenty of solid umpires throughout the world. It's not AS IF umpires in general are all in tip top condition. In fact, many are so out of shape it's a wonder more don't just keel over and die on the field like opening day. Bring in younger umpires in better physical shape and I bet we'd see much better calls in baseball instead of most of these half blind, fat slobs currently calling games.

Angel Hernandez has graded out as one of worse behind-the-plate umps in the last 5 years.  When the league tries to hold him accountable, he sues the league.   I believe Angel Hernandez has a law-suit against the league for discrimination.  Robo-Umps would negate such ploys by incompetent umps.   

(08-13-2019, 03:08 PM)guyofthetiger Wrote: MLB is definitely heading in the direction of autocalling balls and strikes. Personally, I see no problem in getting the proper call. The minor league tests allowed the umpire to override the call. Next, what about a check swing being called a strike or ball? Not sure how you'd automate that when the pitch is a ball and the batter check swings. What about strike three foul tips? The point is you can't just call balls and strikes.

From my understanding, the umps will still be behind the plate.  They will have an ear piece that "dings" when the ball is a strike.  There is still a need for umps to make calls at home-plate as opposing players slide in from 3rd base.  Not sure on check swings.  Maybe check swings could be monitored by a laser plane and if the bat head crosses the plane, it is a strike.  

(08-13-2019, 03:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Even umps have subconscious biases.  Pete Rose used to get good calls because he had a reputation of having a great eye.  If he took a close pitch with two strikes it was assumed to be a ball.  I'd say Votto got the same treatment when he was hitting like an MVP.

This is one big aspect people tend to discount and it's just human nature I suppose ?

As you say Pete Rose and Rookie X don't have the same stike zone. Tony Gwynn and Joe Bench Warmer didn't either. And it's still true today.

But I still agree more with Grampahol

(08-13-2019, 05:22 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: From my understanding, the umps will still be behind the plate.  They will have an ear piece that "dings" when the ball is a strike.  There is still a need for umps to make calls at home-plate as opposing players slide in from 3rd base.  Not sure on check swings.  Maybe check swings could be monitored by a laser plane and if the bat head crosses the plane, it is a strike.  

That makes it better, I guess

Technology has made great advances in sports. It can determine balls and strikes easily, and having it on TV allows the audience to see that too. If it wasn't there, it would give more validity to the umpires making the calls the way they think.

So basically I agree with you. Technology is advanced and visible enough that umpires are not needed to call balls and strikes.

Since we're on a Bengals forum, technology could (and should) also be used to speed up and help determine what is and is not a penalty.
For example, with so many cameras nowadays, it should be easy and quick to determine whether contact to the head actually happens or not without a ref calling it and then taking multiple minutes to then make that determination from a review.

Here is a brilliant idea I just came up with.

Th bases should light up when a baserunner touches them. That way the ump can watch the tag (or the catch on a force play) to see if a player is out or safe. It has to be hard to watch both at the same time.

(08-14-2019, 01:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Here is a brilliant idea I just came up with.

Th bases should light up when a baserunner touches them.  That way the ump can watch the tag (or the catch on a force play) to see if a player is out or safe.  It has to be hard to watch both at the same time.

The only problem is the defender may also be touching the bag. 

(08-16-2019, 01:24 PM)guyofthetiger Wrote: The only problem is the defender may also be touching the bag. 

It would have to be activated by something just the baserunners wear.

Wouldn't need robo-umps if the Ump Union was willing to get rid of their worst guys.

Something like.... the two worst-graded umpires in terms of balls-and-strikes each year are let go, or if you are graded in the bottom 10 in terms of balls-and-strikes in back-to-back years, or 3-out-of-5 years you are let go. (There are 68 umpires.)

We would be rid of the Joe Wests and Angel Hernandezs.

(08-18-2019, 07:40 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Wouldn't need robo-umps if the Ump Union was willing to get rid of their worst guys.

Something like.... the two worst-graded umpires in terms of balls-and-strikes each year are let go, or if you are graded in the bottom 10 in terms of balls-and-strikes in back-to-back years, or 3-out-of-5 years you are let go. (There are 68 umpires.)

We would be rid of the Joe Wests and Angel Hernandezs.

This would not fix the problem.  Some are worse than others but they ALL miss some calls.

It would get rid of all the whining by both sides on balls and strikes.