Technology — and Umpires — Are Imperfect

f.montoya · 10-23-2009, 11:47 AM

Quoted from NY Times...

TECHNOLOGY — AND UMPIRES — ARE IMPERFECT Fox and TBS use SportVision to create their strike-zone graphics. The company’s chief executive, Hank Adams, says the technical toy can track pitches to within a half-inch of reality. Buck and Caray have called it an approximation of reality. Yes, there is value to seeing how a pitcher works a hitter. But if the tool is not perfect and each umpire has different versions of the strike zone, we are left with confusion. Example: on Wednesday night, on a 3-1 count to the Phillies’ Chase Utley, TBS’s PitchTrax showed three pitches in the strike zone. Who was wrong — and on which pitch? Advice: use it even more judiciously than Fox does, and not nearly as often as TBS does, only in HD.

I used to play whiffleball when I was a kid. My friends and I found a rectangular, plastic container that fit what the size we wanted our strike zone to be. We set it on a couple of bricks behind home plate and ruled that if we hear the ball hit it, it's a strike, as long as it wasn't on a bounce. Never had an argument because sounds don't lie. Neither does PitchTrax. It has the capability to be the plastic strike zone container for MLB. In all fairness, what is your opinion and what is most important to you? Getting calls right or tradition?

TribeFanInNC · 10-23-2009, 12:00 PM

This is a very difficult question. I'm a pretty conservative traditionalist. My overall preference would be use this system as feedback to train the umpires to be consistent. I would rather maintain the current umpire structure rather than turn this into tennis officiating.

But on the flip side, the way TV technology can slo-mo and zoom and highlight mistakes makes this very hard for the umpires. Any mistake they make gets totally blow up for everyone to see. It is a no win situation for them. Either they continue to get embarassed in national TV for their calls or they concede their job function to a computer.

Overall, I'm fine with balls and strikes the way they are. It's the out/safe calls that are a problem. Those should be reviewable along with home runs. I don't agree with review on fair or foul in the field of play because of the base runner implications.

P.S. Way to use your 5000th post in style

TribeFanInNC · 10-23-2009, 12:02 PM

oops, double post

TribeFanInNC · 10-23-2009, 12:03 PM

D'Oh!!! Triple post!

jbergey22 · 10-24-2009, 02:18 PM

The umpires behind the plate calling balls and strikes never really bothered me until this year. I seen so many times where an umpire was scared to call a batter out on strikes to end a game it became unbearable at times. Since this is more often than not the most critical calls of the game perhaps we do need an automated machine to make these decisions because it has become apparent that the umps no longer have the sac to make these tough calls when games are being decided.

f.montoya · 10-26-2009, 03:51 AM

We're probably another 75 years away from "automated" umpiring. And even then there will be 'purists' against the idea.

dudeosu · 10-26-2009, 08:56 AM

Getting the call right for me is way more important than any human element. Removing the inconsistent elements of game calling removes any questions about "the right call" and puts the outcome of the game squarely on the competition of the players, which is what I think we all really want anyway.

I don't think the technology is ready yet though. When it surpasses umpires in accuracy, quickness and cost then I'm all for replacing umpires, or any other official in any other sport. Until then, call away.

f.montoya · 10-26-2009, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudeosu

Getting the call right for me is way more important than any human element. Removing the inconsistent elements of game calling removes any questions about "the right call" and puts the outcome of the game squarely on the competition of the players, which is what I think we all really want anyway.

I don't think the technology is ready yet though. When it surpasses umpires in accuracy, quickness and cost then I'm all for replacing umpires, or any other official in any other sport. Until then, call away.

Oh, the technology is there. Rig the player and the bases with sensors. implant the baseballs with transponders. along with players' gloves. Laser sync it all and write a nifty program that makes the calls. Add a voice announce for results and connect it to the P.A.

I still think no one will actually put something like that together for another 75 years and no one will even want it, even then.

10-23-2009, 11:47 AM	#1 (permalink)
f.montoya Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 5,718 Thanks: 180 Thanked 140x in 68 posts	Technology — and Umpires — Are Imperfect Quoted from NY Times... TECHNOLOGY — AND UMPIRES — ARE IMPERFECT Fox and TBS use SportVision to create their strike-zone graphics. The company’s chief executive, Hank Adams, says the technical toy can track pitches to within a half-inch of reality. Buck and Caray have called it an approximation of reality. Yes, there is value to seeing how a pitcher works a hitter. But if the tool is not perfect and each umpire has different versions of the strike zone, we are left with confusion. Example: on Wednesday night, on a 3-1 count to the Phillies’ Chase Utley, TBS’s PitchTrax showed three pitches in the strike zone. Who was wrong — and on which pitch? Advice: use it even more judiciously than Fox does, and not nearly as often as TBS does, only in HD. I used to play whiffleball when I was a kid. My friends and I found a rectangular, plastic container that fit what the size we wanted our strike zone to be. We set it on a couple of bricks behind home plate and ruled that if we hear the ball hit it, it's a strike, as long as it wasn't on a bounce. Never had an argument because sounds don't lie. Neither does PitchTrax. It has the capability to be the plastic strike zone container for MLB. In all fairness, what is your opinion and what is most important to you? Getting calls right or tradition? __________________ Fidel Montoya Asahi2 Baseball Commissioner(Historical League Since 2004) www.allsimbaseball.com (OOTP web hosting - Customized sites for online leagues - Sign up, Connect OOTP and Play!) Share Your Mods - Free, unlimited and easy to upload to share your Mods instantly(free site registration required)

10-23-2009, 12:00 PM	#2 (permalink)
TribeFanInNC Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,498 Thanks: 86 Thanked 253x in 204 posts	This is a very difficult question. I'm a pretty conservative traditionalist. My overall preference would be use this system as feedback to train the umpires to be consistent. I would rather maintain the current umpire structure rather than turn this into tennis officiating. But on the flip side, the way TV technology can slo-mo and zoom and highlight mistakes makes this very hard for the umpires. Any mistake they make gets totally blow up for everyone to see. It is a no win situation for them. Either they continue to get embarassed in national TV for their calls or they concede their job function to a computer. Overall, I'm fine with balls and strikes the way they are. It's the out/safe calls that are a problem. Those should be reviewable along with home runs. I don't agree with review on fair or foul in the field of play because of the base runner implications. P.S. Way to use your 5000th post in style __________________ PEBA - Duluth Warriors

10-23-2009, 12:02 PM	#3 (permalink)
TribeFanInNC Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,498 Thanks: 86 Thanked 253x in 204 posts	oops, double post __________________ PEBA - Duluth Warriors Last edited by TribeFanInNC; 10-23-2009 at 12:05 PM.

10-23-2009, 12:03 PM	#4 (permalink)
TribeFanInNC Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,498 Thanks: 86 Thanked 253x in 204 posts	D'Oh!!! Triple post! __________________ PEBA - Duluth Warriors Last edited by TribeFanInNC; 10-23-2009 at 12:05 PM.

10-26-2009, 03:51 AM	#6 (permalink)
f.montoya Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 5,718 Thanks: 180 Thanked 140x in 68 posts	We're probably another 75 years away from "automated" umpiring. And even then there will be 'purists' against the idea. __________________ Fidel Montoya Asahi2 Baseball Commissioner(Historical League Since 2004) www.allsimbaseball.com (OOTP web hosting - Customized sites for online leagues - Sign up, Connect OOTP and Play!) Share Your Mods - Free, unlimited and easy to upload to share your Mods instantly(free site registration required)

10-24-2009, 02:18 PM	#5 (permalink)
jbergey22 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,032 Thanks: 134 Thanked 126x in 95 posts	The umpires behind the plate calling balls and strikes never really bothered me until this year. I seen so many times where an umpire was scared to call a batter out on strikes to end a game it became unbearable at times. Since this is more often than not the most critical calls of the game perhaps we do need an automated machine to make these decisions because it has become apparent that the umps no longer have the sac to make these tough calls when games are being decided.

10-26-2009, 08:56 AM	#7 (permalink)
dudeosu Major Leagues Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cincinnati Posts: 365 Thanks: 17 Thanked 32x in 20 posts	Getting the call right for me is way more important than any human element. Removing the inconsistent elements of game calling removes any questions about "the right call" and puts the outcome of the game squarely on the competition of the players, which is what I think we all really want anyway. I don't think the technology is ready yet though. When it surpasses umpires in accuracy, quickness and cost then I'm all for replacing umpires, or any other official in any other sport. Until then, call away.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode