I don’t think bad umpires ruined it.
I think bad umpires have been a problem forever, it’s just so much easier to quantify/show it with super high res HD cameras, statcast, etc.
Now, instead of just seeing Eric Gregg call a pitch 6 inches outside a strike in grainy, blurry video, you can see exactly where it crossed the plate, how far off the plate it was, and have measurable stats to prove it/show it.
Technology makes it so easy to see the terrible ones now.
I just don’t subscribe to this. Would it be ok if a referee decided that the two yard line counted as a TD as long as he was consistent with it?
As long as it’s consistent within a game, honestly, sure. This is a sport where the same ball hit 315’ to left can be a homer or die before it reaches the track, depending on the ballpark. Variations like that add flavor.
That said, I am happy to sacrifice that flavor to ensure consistency from pitch to pitch.
I didnt like the DH, Now it has grown on me. I still don’t like the ghost runner in extras or the 3 batter min pitch rule. I think I would like electronic strike zone. It certainly helped the game of tennis to get consistent calls on in bounds balls.
It would give the A. Hernandez’s a reprieve from the awful job they do behind the plate, though they can still fuckup the game in the field.
I have moved on this issue, going from a hell-yes on robot umps to an undecided. According to a study on fangraphs or something I saw some time back umpires have gotten significantly better over the past ten years, and the trend is still alive. I also have increased misgivings about anything that makes the game more attractive to gamblers and increasing appreciation for the place human messiness currently occupies in the game.
Is it definitely better now that we have boring replay and no managers screaming from the dugout? I don’t honesty know. It is certainly less colorful.
The excruciating momentary pause we have all grown up experiencing between the caught pitch and the umpire’s call is a deep component of baseball’s atmosphere. The fact that umpires have better and worse zones and personalities is too. In a robot umpire world the antagonism between the pitcher and umpire in Roth’s The Great American Novel wouldn’t have unfolded so gloriously.
I might prefer the drama, even though it drives me as crazy as the next guy.
If they ever got rid of the really bad ones, I could see it. But there is the Union and all.
This is an absolutely insane take.
If you want screaming managers and temper tantrums, might I recommend professional wrestling to you instead?
The major issue here is that umpires, once they reach the big leagues, have ZERO incentive to get better at their jobs. Their union protects them from any form of punishment for being outright terrible, so they can essentially just rest on their laurels until they are ready to retire (ala Joe West).
If the umpire union would take just a pinch of responsibility for training/improving/punishing umpires, then maybe it would be worth having “personalities” that are terrible, but the fact that an umpire can scream “I can do whatever I want” at a coach with essentially no repercussions when he’s literally not doing his job is fucking crazypants.
Well, obviously automation is a great way to circumvent labor unions. But you’re ignoring the fact that umpires have gotten better at their jobs. We’ve come a long way since Eric Gregg. My insane idea is that there are things more important than strike-zone accuracy.
Not for a home plate umpire. That’s literally his job. The only reason he’s there.
The plate’s not gonna clean itself.
I don’t give a fuck about circumventing the labor union, I care about it actually giving a shit about the product it instead protects to the absolute detriment to the sport it’s a part of.
The umpires union famously shows their ass to the rest of baseball in the face of outright awfulness (see Hernandez, Angel) and instead of doing something about it they flash a shit eating grin and flip to the B side of Joe West’s shitty, shitty country music album.
If it doesn’t come with reduced salary, I’m guessing the umpires would be on board. I know I would if I were an umpire. Free me up to work on my awesome strike three call.
As Castro just watched strike 3. Not in zone. Errrrr.
I personally think the electronic strike zone calls is a must.
The technology is there
Just add a strike or ball light to the scoreboard or wall somewhere near centerfield.
If it lights up one color it’s a strike if it lights up a different color it’s a ball.
Umpires wait a split second and make the call after they see the light.
No other changes.
I see this as an evolution to the game, like modern balls that are mass produced identically( mostly) or batting helmets, not any kind of drastic change.
As technology is developed to improve the game use it.
The problem nowadays is that umps have gone to those fancy synthetic brushes rather than the old-school straw whisk broom. The new ones pull to the left, throwing off the entire strike zone.
I know I’m inventing obstacles here, but sometimes, as a catcher, you need an immediate ball/strike call. Such as when a runner is running on a full count…you don’t want to throw to 2B if it’s ball four. In fact, umpires know this and will often make a special effort to call it quickly and loudly in that situation, even if they normally don’t have a loud “ball” call.
If the electronic strike zone is authentic, then it seems like this will be much less of a problem since catchers generally have a good feel for the zone.
However, I do get where you’re coming from, and that is a small piece that might actually be important to the system.
Stop coddling the catchers special interests group.
They knew the risk when they put on the gear. I say, let em crash.
I think you could have an instant automated call that the ump can then overturn if the system clearly screwed up. It would take some getting used to, but that seems better than the call always being a little bit delayed.
The E-Tools of Ignorance