Are you in favor of a robotic strike zone?

[beatlesrule]

Yes is currently leading by 20 votes.  Not overwhelming but still winning.  For those against it, you don't want balls and strikes called perfectly?  When Trout strikes out looking from a pitch 3 inches off the plate to end the game with the winning run on 3rd, you're fine with that?  You're fine with a game, series, World Series being decided on blown balls or strikes when technology exists that can eliminate all that?

[Stradling]

5 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

Yes is currently leading by 20 votes.  Not overwhelming but still winning.  For those against it, you don't want balls and strikes called perfectly?  When Trout strikes out looking from a pitch 3 inches off the plate to end the game with the winning run on 3rd, you're fine with that?  You're fine with a game, series, World Series being decided on blown balls or strikes when technology exists that can eliminate all that?

How do you know it’s 3 inches off the plate?   

[UndertheHalo]

39 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

Yes is currently leading by 20 votes.  Not overwhelming but still winning.  For those against it, you don't want balls and strikes called perfectly?  When Trout strikes out looking from a pitch 3 inches off the plate to end the game with the winning run on 3rd, you're fine with that?  You're fine with a game, series, World Series being decided on blown balls or strikes when technology exists that can eliminate all that?

No, it’s not about being fine with blown calls.  It’s about my understanding of baseball.   For me, as I understand the game.  The strike zone is not a static thing.  It’s fluid.  it’s up to the batter to understand that, correctly identify and adjust.  If a batter wants to roll the dice and leave his bat on his shoulder thats how he’s choosing to play the game and if he gets rung up thats it.  Part of the skill is knowing when it’s too close and you have to protect.  The idea that umpires are just purposefully F*ck*ing with batters and thus must be removed is so ridiculous.  That’s basically what some of you guys are saying. 

Equally Its part of the catchers job to make balls appear more like strikes.  It’s all part of the game.  It’s what makes baseball a great game. 

An automated strike zone will quickly be figured out by hitters and then the game is fundamentally changed.  F*ck that.  You guys voting for it are just looking for frustration to be relieved.  Baseball is a frustrating game this is how it’s supposed to be.  If a robo strike zone comes something else will cause your butt to be sore.  There will always be something to whine about. 

I can just see it.  “The robot umpire got hacked !”

wahhhh. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by UndertheHalo

[Taylor]

I voted Yes, mostly because I'd want to see Bryce Harper losing his sh1t to RoboUmp's unfavorable ball/strike call.

[ten ocho recon scout]

10 hours ago, Thomas said:

I'm tired of these inferior humans who are always missing the pitches. The game would go a lot faster if we got rid of the human element entirely. 

Still a better defense than Oakland.

[JustATroutFan]

Stupid umpire just cost Trout a base on ball tonight. Retarded home plate umpires has been a constant problem for Trout for years now. Either way, I need these retarded home plate umpires to go away and bring in robot umps, so hitters and pitchers can both are even in relations to the strike zone.

[kevinb]

I don’t understand why people wouldn’t want to get the call 100% right all the time.  The game will go by that much faster. Catchers don’t have to worry about faking out the umpire but framing some pitch a certain way to trick the umpire. They can worry about calling a game and throwing out the runner trying to steal. Keep the umps behind the plate to keep up the appearance of tradition. That’s it. Let’s move this game to the 21st century. Tennis has it for line calls. Basketball has it for if it’s a 3 or 2 pointer. NFL keeps getting more technologically advanced etc 

[GrittyVeterans]

27 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Anyone remember when Brian Fuentes walked in the tying run in the bottom of the 9th at Fenway? It was a fastball right down the middle. Even in gameday it was literally in the middle of the zone and the ump called it a ball in obvious retaliation against the Angels for arguing about balls and strikes just prior. From that time on I have been in favir of electronic zones.

I remember that game. Infuriating. I believe that would've ended the game too if that idiot ump called it correctly

[Torridd]

6 hours ago, Kevinb said:

I don’t understand why people wouldn’t want to get the call 100% right all the time.  The game will go by that much faster. Catchers don’t have to worry about faking out the umpire but framing some pitch a certain way to trick the umpire. They can worry about calling a game and throwing out the runner trying to steal. Keep the umps behind the plate to keep up the appearance of tradition. That’s it. Let’s move this game to the 21st century. Tennis has it for line calls. Basketball has it for if it’s a 3 or 2 pointer. NFL keeps getting more technologically advanced etc 

Also, just because we have "robotic calls" doesn't mean they won't be disputed. Players will argue is that really a strike and discussions will arise if something is wrong with the system. Like someone said, the strike zone is fluid depending on the batter. It would be awfully difficult to calculate consistently.

[Stradling]

I don’t understand how some think it’s going to be 100% accurate.  Granted it will be more consistent which is why I’m for it, I doubt it will be 100% accurate.   The computer is going to calculate the bottom of the knee of Altuve and the bottom of the knee on Judge with 100% accuracy with them wearing high pants or low pants?  The people who think it will be 100% accurate are the ones who think it’s currently only 80% accurate.  Also the conspiracy theorists (no offense Vladdy this isn’t about you) will say that they will program it to give the Yankees, Red Sox a favorable strike zone. An improvement, probably, 100% accurate, highly doubtful.   I still think most of this comes down to the k zone box not being very accurate on the corners.  

[kevinb]

23 hours ago, BackUpTheTruck said:

I agree with you on every other sport. But being that baseball is the national pastime, I voted no because I felt certain things should be kept, such as yelling at the home plate umpire. We will never see a base being thrown again, which is fine, because baserunning plays are important to get right, and so are home runs. One reason I can live with an inconsistent home plate umpire is that the umpire can do "make up calls" in the same at-bat, and batters can recover. And if there is an inconsistent umpire, the batter should know it and protect the plate. That, in most cases, works for both teams. Umpires also sometimes give "mercy strikes" to a pitcher on a 3-0 count when the batter is clearly taking the pitch, in the spirit of sportsmanship.  Yes, with technology, you would get the call right every time and the better team will always win the game, but in my view, if Major League Baseball makes that step, a lot of tradition and emotion would be taken out of the game.

Disagree if u go to a game to watch a manager yell at an umpire that’s silly. Nothing ever gets overturned it just them yelling at each other than the umpire or player being ejected. That’s not much fun. 

[Lou]

I'd stand straight up wearing fake kneecaps halfway up my thighs. 

[arch stanton]

The corners never change so if there was a way to accurately judge that portion with technology the umps could concentrate on the top and bottom of the zone. Maybe even move out from behind the catcher to get a better view. 

[TM3]

I voted No, firstly tradition and secondly there will be guys that will game or exploit the system from both pitchers to batters. Imagine someone like Atruve with a very small strike zone and what happens if he crunches down even further? 

Lastly, it will take away the emotional aspect of the game that we've all come to love and hate but that's baseball. 

[kevinb]

18 minutes ago, TM3 said:

I voted No, firstly tradition and secondly there will be guys that will game or exploit the system from both pitchers to batters. Imagine someone like Atruve with a very small strike zone and what happens if he crunches down even further? 

Lastly, it will take away the emotional aspect of the game that we've all come to love and hate but that's baseball. 

So you’d rather a game or an at bat be in the hands of an emotional umpire? Also what’s from Altuve doing that now with an umpire. Computers don’t have bias people do. 

[Docwaukee]

I checked brooks baseball, and according to the kzone map, the ump got about 20 calls wrong last night.  Worse than Laz Diaz the night before who got 15 wrong.  

There's gotta be a happy medium in there somewhere.  I don't want ump affecting the game that significantly.  

Think about it.  An entire turn through the order could be figuring out where the umps strike zone is gonna be and who figures it out first.  the pitcher or hitters.  

I really don't enjoy watching Trout go down 0-1 on a pitch out of the zone cuz I feel like we see it a lot.  Calhoun k'd on three called pitches out of the zone the other night.  

One thing I do know is that 99.9% of the fan population don't go to see the umpire do his thing.  

[TM3]

6 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

So you’d rather a game or an at bat be in the hands of an emotional umpire? Also what’s from Altuve doing that now with an umpire. Computers don’t have bias people do. 

Of course, the human element is what makes baseball exciting. It won't be close to the same with a computer calling balls and strikes.

 

[kevinb]

It’s also not to blame the umps they do the best they can. It’s just an impossible task. The speed of the pitches the way catchers are tricking the umpire and just it’s extremely hard to do. Get them help and get the calls right. If the tech is there move to it. 

[kevinb]

3 minutes ago, TM3 said:

Of course, the human element is what makes baseball exciting. It won't be close to the same with a computer calling balls and strikes.

 

None of that makes baseball exciting. If your watching baseball because u think the umpire will mess up your watching for the wrong reasons. Baseball is a great game with out having umpires with bias or having an off night. Or calling balls and strikes because of a home crowd. 

[TM3]

Just now, Kevinb said:

None of that makes baseball exciting. If your watching baseball because u think the umpire will mess up your watching for the wrong reasons. Baseballs a great game with out having umpires with bias or having an off night. Or calling balls and strikes because of a home crowd. 

Seems like a novel idea on the surface but pilot one game with this and quickly realize how boring it will make the game.

No 3rd party human interaction or involvement just a pitcher VS batter like watching 2 guys playing chess. Boring. 

 

[kevinb]

1 minute ago, TM3 said:

Seems like a novel idea on the surface but pilot one game with this and quickly realize how boring it will make the game.

No 3rd party human interaction or involvement just a pitcher VS batter like watching 2 guys playing chess. Boring. 

 

How boring an at bat will be? I take it you dislike Baseball. 

[TM3]

16 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

How boring an at bat will be? I take it you dislike Baseball. 

Baseball is not a total geek sport, you want to make it exciting for the fans as well.

Why stop there? Eliminate the umps all together as I'm sure technology can be designed to call the plays at the bases as well. Place a chip inside the bases and the players gloves. Just have the entire game automated and then see how fun that becomes for the fans.... 

[kevinb]

11 minutes ago, TM3 said:

Baseball is not a total geek sport, you want to make it exciting for the fans as well.

Why stop there? Eliminate the umps all together as I'm sure technology can be designed to call the plays at the bases as well. Place a chip inside the bases and the players gloves. Just have the entire game automated and then see how fun that becomes for the fans.... 

So your saying I never have to see an old umpire or referee calling fouls etc in any sport? Where do I sign up. I don’t care about refs umpires etc if they have the tech to get it right 100% of the time then do so. Sports are meant for the athletes not to have some middle aged man/woman dictating the outcome of the game by making mistakes. No one shows up to watch a referee. 

[Stradling]

8 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

So your saying I never have to see an old umpire or referee calling fouls etc in any sport? Where do I sign up. I don’t care about refs umpires etc if they have the tech to get it right 100% of the time then do so. Sports are meant for the athletes not to have some middle aged man/woman dictating the outcome of the game by making mistakes. No one shows up to watch a referee. 

You keep saying 100% right, that isn’t going to happen even with robotic umps, especially not at the beginning.  I am curious what recourse there would be if for some reason there’s a glitch and an obvious awful strike call, we’re talking a foot outside and called a strike.   That doesn’t happen now.   Can the home plate umpire over rule it?

[kevinb]

19 minutes ago, SuperTroopers said:

You keep saying 100% right, that isn’t going to happen even with robotic umps, especially not at the beginning.  I am curious what recourse there would be if for some reason there’s a glitch and an obvious awful strike call, we’re talking a foot outside and called a strike.   That doesn’t happen now.   Can the home plate umpire over rule it?

Fine 99.9% and sure but I highly doubt if the technology is there to get these calls correct it’ll call a strike a foot outside the strike zone more than an umpire would. The game is about having the players beat the players not about having to beat an umpire as well. A “Robotic” strike zone would get us closer to just being team v team.