Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30

Thread: Article: Are We Ever Biased Towards Umpire Bias?

  1. #1
    Owner All-Star John Bonnes's Avatar
    Posts
    2,298
    Like
    1
    Liked 115 Times in 65 Posts
    Blog Entries
    231

    Article: Are We Ever Biased Towards Umpire Bias?


  2. #2
    Senior Member Triple-A Teflon's Avatar
    Posts
    226
    Like
    0
    Liked 12 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8
    How would it be any different than a ref in the NFL deciding when and where to enforce the out-of-bounds line based on the score of the game or hockey waiving offsides calls for teams that are trailing? Geez Louise. Imagine a crisply played baseball game where at-bats were actually resolved based on the true merit of the pitch being thrown. I would pay more to go to those kinds of games.

  3. #3
    Senior Member All-Star Thrylos's Avatar
    Posts
    3,801
    Like
    27
    Liked 321 Times in 191 Posts
    Blog Entries
    198
    yeah
    Umpire Bias has no place in sports. These guys act like the sport owes them. They can replace them with cameras these days and have a more fair and better played game. Get a ballboy behind Home Plate to throw in balls.
    -----
    Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
    http://tenthinningstretch.blogspot.com/
    twitter: @thrylos98

  4. #4
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,388
    Like
    50
    Liked 35 Times in 23 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by John Bonnes View Post
    Donít we want someone who prompts the batter and pitcher to resolve their conflicts themselves?
    You're overlooking a very large piece of the puzzle. The batter and pitcher DID resolve the play. The pitcher threw the ball and the batter made the decision to not swing. That pitch should be called accurately exactly because the play WAS resolved by the batter and pitcher. This is the exact same problem that occurs at the end of many professional basketball games (with the same argument of "let the players decide the outcome"). The players DID decide the outcome with their actions. If it is a ball or strike with the first pitch then it's a ball or strike with the last. To me the real question here is ... how much emphasis should be given to the pitch f/x by the umpires? Should they try to adjust their calls now that there is a feedback mechanism? Can you adjust your ball/strike calls in those situations just by knowing your biased? That would be an interesting experiment!

  5. #5
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,224
    Like
    15
    Liked 66 Times in 48 Posts
    Blog Entries
    26
    Is data about individual umpires public or at least available to teams?

    Perhaps teams might adjust how aggressive they are at the plate based on the home plate umpire.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator MVP USAFChief's Avatar
    Posts
    5,340
    Like
    1,419
    Liked 1,091 Times in 490 Posts
    A few points:

    1. I don't think it's necessarily accurate to say that we KNOW a given pitch was a ball or strike based on pitch f/x. We only KNOW where pitch f/x measured it. There's no way to measure whether pitch f/x is accurate, other than blind trust. It might be quite accurate. Then again, it might not. How would we know? Not to mention, as far as I know the top and bottom of the pitch f/x strike zone is still human input guesswork, because that changes with every hitter.

    2. Umpires are given pitch f/x data after every game they call behind the plate.

    3. Teams have kept "books" on umpires for a long long time. Each individual umpires tendencies are known to hitters and pitchers.

  7. #7
    Member Single-A
    Posts
    83
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Oxtung View Post
    You're overlooking a very large piece of the puzzle. The batter and pitcher DID resolve the play. The pitcher threw the ball and the batter made the decision to not swing. That pitch should be called accurately exactly because the play WAS resolved by the batter and pitcher.
    Correct. This is why Red Sox/Yankees games take so blasted long to play: everybody in both lineups knows the ump doesn't want to call them out on a borderline pitch. If there has to be bias, it would be better if the umps erred on the side of calling close pitches strikes. Hitters would take more swings earlier in the count, there'd be more balls in play, fewer pitches thrown, and faster games. Maybe we could get back to 11-man pitching staffs!

  8. #8
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    4,609
    Like
    512
    Liked 214 Times in 147 Posts
    Agree with the above, it is an active choice not to swing or to swing. A pitch should always be called for where it was thrown, regardless of the situation. It is the only truly fair way to play a game, by the rules. Otherwise, it is not a fair contest. I 100 percent hate umpire and referee bias.

  9. #9
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    4,609
    Like
    512
    Liked 214 Times in 147 Posts
    To add to my thoughts....bias is one of the reasons I don't watch the NBA. Bias is one reason I stopped watching Braves baseball back in the day. How can we ever know that Jordan was the best basketball player ever, if he got every call? Call the game the same way, for everyone, all the time during a game. That's the only fair way to play a game. If two people are playing against each other, but one is playing by rules that give her an advantage, are they even playing the same game? I have no idea why anyone would like bias. Take the "let the players decide" idiocy of the NFL interference rules. By not calling interference, because you want the play to rule, you are actually not doing so. If it is interference, it is interference. By not calling the penalty, you are not letting the playerd decide the game, you are letting one player play by different rules, and making it an unfair contest. It's logical laziness to say you are letting the players decide the outcome of that play.

    Have I mentioned how much I hate unfair application of rules in sports and other competitions? There is no good argument for the bad application of rules. None.*

    *in professional or other high level competitions, we aren't talking about little kids here.....
    Lighten up Francis....

  10. #10
    Senior Member All-Star JB_Iowa's Avatar
    Posts
    1,909
    Like
    433
    Liked 358 Times in 203 Posts
    While my first reaction would be that I hate umpire bias, my second thought is: "I love the game."

    Given that what John is describing is unintentional umpire bias (i.e. human nature), I have to think that it has ALWAYS been present in the way that games have been umped.

    Trying to rid the game of this unintentional bias could have a significant impact on the game -- and quite frankly, I'm not sure we'd be happy with the results.

    Educate umpires. Keep monitoring performance. Make gradual improvements.

    Just because we have technology to make changes doesn't necessarily mean that it would be an improvement. And, as pointed out above, it doesn't necessarily mean that the technology is totally accurate either.

  11. #11
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    4,609
    Like
    512
    Liked 214 Times in 147 Posts
    I would love it if strikes were strike, and balls were balls. A totally fair contest between pitcher and hitter. That would be cool. As jb points out, making the change is not so easy.....and change always has unintended consequences.
    Lighten up Francis....

  12. #12
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    240
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    We want the game called as accurately and consistently as possible. Surely we can all agree on that? I am not an advocate of instant replay nor of human umpires being replaced by technology. I am in favor of using technology to help the human umpires improve their performance, in this case, using the f/x technology to remove this bias.

  13. #13
    Senior Member All-Star YourHouseIsMyHouse's Avatar
    Posts
    1,235
    Like
    8
    Liked 17 Times in 12 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    Very interesting piece John. I really thought about the vaccination question before I read on and decided that vaccination would be the best idea. I would really like to see more commission than omission from home plate. I think borderline strikes should always be called, because the hitter has to know that it's close enough to where he could be caught looking. The 80% to 60% gap because of an 0-2 count is definitely not surprising and frustrating to say the least. Pitchers get squeezed in those situations a lot! Umpires need to stop taking pity upon batters and call the game the way it was designed to. You'd think they'd want to get out as quickly as possible, but that is never the case!

  14. #14
    Junior Member Rookie sln477's Avatar
    Posts
    7
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    I was working on an article that addresses this issue, but in a different light. Do umpires "create" great pitchers & relegate others to average or poor pitchers. I have often wondered if umps have biases towards certain clubs/coaching staffs than others. It is human nature to "favor" someone who is favorable to you, while it is also human nature to be "less favorable" to those that may treat you less favorably; even though we are not inclined to admit as much. We have watch countless hours of baseball & probably all agree that we have wondered why pitcher "X" is getting the calls, while pitcher "Z" is not receiving the same calls. It can then be said, that pitcher "Z" now has to be more precise, thus possibly making more mistakes, leading to poorer performances. I can't help but think that some, not all, umpires have this bias towards certain clubs/managers. Any thoughts??

  15. #15
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Boom Boom's Avatar
    Posts
    974
    Like
    4
    Liked 117 Times in 52 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sln477 View Post
    I was working on an article that addresses this issue, but in a different light. Do umpires "create" great pitchers & relegate others to average or poor pitchers. I have often wondered if umps have biases towards certain clubs/coaching staffs than others. It is human nature to "favor" someone who is favorable to you, while it is also human nature to be "less favorable" to those that may treat you less favorably; even though we are not inclined to admit as much. We have watch countless hours of baseball & probably all agree that we have wondered why pitcher "X" is getting the calls, while pitcher "Z" is not receiving the same calls. It can then be said, that pitcher "Z" now has to be more precise, thus possibly making more mistakes, leading to poorer performances. I can't help but think that some, not all, umpires have this bias towards certain clubs/managers. Any thoughts??
    I would imagine that this has more to do with the individual pitchers than the teams. Pitchers with long track records of success will often get the benefit of the doubt on close pitches, while green rookies and journeymen will not. It may also have something to do with the catchers and their ability to frame a pitch. If a catcher has to move his glove much to catch a pitch, even if the pitch is caught in the strike zone, the umpire may have a more difficult time making the correct call because of the extra variable of the moving target.

  16. #16
    Member Single-A
    Posts
    83
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Boom Boom View Post
    I would imagine that this has more to do with the individual pitchers than the teams. Pitchers with long track records of success will often get the benefit of the doubt on close pitches, while green rookies and journeymen will not.
    How about the PJ Walters vs. Jose Bautista AB last weekend? Borderline 2-strike pitch from a marginal big leaguer to a former MVP goes the MVP's way. The AB continues and Bautista hits a HR that decides the game. If Roy Halladay had thrown the very same pitch to Trevor Plouffe, do you think the ump would have called it differently? Should he have?

  17. #17
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Boom Boom's Avatar
    Posts
    974
    Like
    4
    Liked 117 Times in 52 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by James Richter View Post
    How about the PJ Walters vs. Jose Bautista AB last weekend? Borderline 2-strike pitch from a marginal big leaguer to a former MVP goes the MVP's way. The AB continues and Bautista hits a HR that decides the game. If Roy Halladay had thrown the very same pitch to Trevor Plouffe, do you think the ump would have called it differently? Should he have?
    Yes, as established pitchers often get the borderline calls, the inverse is also true. An unproven starter isn't going to get as many calls when he's pitching to a big-time hitter. I don't think that should be the case, but it is what it is.

    When Joe Mauer takes a close pitch he's more likely to get the ball call than Drew Butera. If the umpire doesn't have a great look at the pitch he might defer to a hitter that he thinks has a good eye.

    Come to think of it, that may be an interesting research project. What % of borderline pitches go the way of the hitter when the batter is Derek Jeter, for example, as opposed to Trevor Plouffe?
    Last edited by Boom Boom; 05-17-2012 at 02:04 PM.

  18. #18
    Speediest Moderator All-Star snepp's Avatar
    Posts
    3,628
    Like
    850
    Liked 611 Times in 235 Posts
    Here's an article that I really liked on the topic.

    The Compassionate Umpire


  19. #19
    Junior Member Rookie
    Posts
    27
    Like
    0
    Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    So the results here seem to support the idea that umpires, following years of fan and official comment that games should be decided on the field rather than by an umpire's call, are reluctant to make calls that could decide games?

    Sounds like we're getting exactly what we asked for.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by thrylos98 View Post
    yeah
    Umpire Bias has no place in sports. These guys act like the sport owes them. They can replace them with cameras these days and have a more fair and better played game. Get a ballboy behind Home Plate to throw in balls.
    I hope you are using sarcasm here.
    "Baseball is like church. Many attend, few understand."

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.