Robo-umps working their way up ...

[Squirrel]

They're getting closer ... not close enough yet ... but ... hopefully before too long ... like a prospect, will they make the jump to the majors this year?  

 

https://apnews.com/article/mlb-sports-los-angeles-dodgers-baseball-625898797547e5d4de140755ba9cd0ee?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP_Sports&fbclid=IwAR3QLj-vX6Y8XE0KcfSFQJW4jidr9eL_v9VGvgumJQN2QnEmMQ37vQp2sgo

[LewFordLives]

With the latest improvements in technology, there is no reason humans should be calling balls and strikes. There would still be plenty for the umpire behind the plate to do....keep the game moving along, call hit batters and foul tips, overrule the computer if it's obviously wrong or breaks down..etc..  With the computer calling balls and strikes there would be less complaining and pitchers wouldn't have to waste pitches searching for that day's strike zone.

[AceWrigley]

Give me human umpires and all the idiosyncrasies that come with them.

[Trov]

I read an interesting article after the minor league season was over on how the rule changes they tried worked out.  The article had in depth discussion about the robo umps in the minors.  I have long been a supporter of the robo umps, but that article did raise a lot of things I had not thought.  It even showed some pitches no one would think was a strike called a strike, and other pitches many would think is a strike a ball.  The main issue was how the tech works is they need to develop the zone and decide where a ball entering it will be decided a strike.  It was adjusted for the second half the season.  

I still in full support of the robo zone, to have consistency, if nothing else.  However, I do think it may take a few years to fine tune in the minors and ST games to get the zone they want to move forward with. 

[chpettit19]

3 hours ago, Trov said:

I read an interesting article after the minor league season was over on how the rule changes they tried worked out.  The article had in depth discussion about the robo umps in the minors.  I have long been a supporter of the robo umps, but that article did raise a lot of things I had not thought.  It even showed some pitches no one would think was a strike called a strike, and other pitches many would think is a strike a ball.  The main issue was how the tech works is they need to develop the zone and decide where a ball entering it will be decided a strike.  It was adjusted for the second half the season.  

I still in full support of the robo zone, to have consistency, if nothing else.  However, I do think it may take a few years to fine tune in the minors and ST games to get the zone they want to move forward with. 

The challenge is figuring out what "caught the plate" means. We've all heard and said that a million times. But what does it mean that a pitch "caught the plate?" Caught the front corner? Caught the back corner before it angles to the point? Is the zone 3D or 2D? Is it just where it hits the front corner or can a breaking ball still "catch the corner" at the right angle if it's off the plate at the front of the plate?

A big complaint was breaking balls that hit the dirt being called strikes because they hit the front of the plate in the zone, but were sharp enough they continued down into the dirt before reaching the catcher. In my opinion they should be called a strike. It's where it crosses the plate, not where the catcher catches it. I hate "pitch framing." There should be no such thing as pitch framing. The catcher shouldn't "steal strikes" on the corners. Home plate is 17 inches wide. The ump doesn't get to decide it's 18, 19, 16, 15, 12, 25, whatever from game to game or pitch to pitch. It is 17 inches. 

Figure out if the zone is 2D or 3D and the technology is pretty good already. Fine tune it a bit and let's go.

[Game7-91]

I will support robo umps when we also have robo players.

[Craig Arko]

I’d go for replacing Manfred with an AI.

[dxpavelka]

Robo umps will eliminate ball / strike questions.    That's funny **** right there.

[tony&rodney]

Baseball can't get its act together at this time and hasn't identified an audience like football, basketball, or hockey. Tom Brady rumors light up the internet to focus the public on football on the Saturday before NFC/AFC championship games. That's marketing. Hockey figured out that clutching and holding reduces the skill and excitement of speed and now penalties are called, there is no arguing or a delay of game penalty ensues. Baseball has Manfredball. The CBA needs to be resolved quickly so that baseball can figure out its audience. Umpires are absolutely the least of MLB concerns. 

[bean5302]

Robo umps are a failure even if they're perfect at calling balls and strikes. They're boring.

[TopGunn#22]

The one thing that appeals to me about Robo umps for the plate is that the Robo ump won't give a darn if it's a Yankee, Twin, Dodger or Red Sox at the plate.  Won't matter if A-Rod or Ortiz is at the plate or if it's Kiriloff.  To me, THAT is appealing.  But I must admit, this is a BIG step for baseball.  One with HUGE ramifications.  More than one season of minor league usage may be needed before implementing on the major league level.  I'm not averse to change.  I just don't like MAJOR change coming too rapidly.    

[ashbury]

5 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Robo umps are a failure even if they're perfect at calling balls and strikes. They're boring.

Let's get rid of the visible foul lines while we're at it, and the bases themselves too. All this certainty is boring. Just go with the umpire's opinion at any given moment.

[bean5302]

5 hours ago, ashbury said:

Let's get rid of the visible foul lines while we're at it, and the bases themselves too. All this certainty is boring. Just go with the umpire's opinion at any given moment.

Honestly... the robo ump is the suggestion to get rid of things like visual lines. Why have them? The robots sure don't need them. We can get rid of the plates as you suggest, too. Actually, we can just have players be motion captured and then re-created using CGI. The spreadsheets and databases can then run the games. Like a super advanced version of the simulations in video games. There's no reason to actually play the games at all. Unfortunately, there will be bugs in the simulations, I just know it. Spreadsheets are more reliable. It's far more interesting to watch a macro run in Excel anyway. Kinda like watching that green screen of characters in the Matrix. I'm not good enough to read it like I'm sure you are though... all I see is line drive, home run, strike out.

[ashbury]

11 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Honestly... the robo ump is the suggestion to get rid of things like visual lines. Why have them? The robots sure don't need them. We can get rid of the plates as you suggest, too. Actually, we can just have players be motion captured and then re-created using CGI. The spreadsheets and databases can then run the games. Like a super advanced version of the simulations in video games. There's no reason to actually play the games at all. Unfortunately, there will be bugs in the simulations, I just know it. Spreadsheets are more reliable. It's far more interesting to watch a macro run in Excel anyway. Kinda like watching that green screen of characters in the Matrix. I'm not good enough to read it like I'm sure you are though... all I see is line drive, home run, strike out.

Satire becomes really difficult when the target takes it farther than the satirist.

[tony&rodney]

Robo umpires is a perfect example of the dysfunction of MLB. Who does baseball see as their customers? 

A survey of all pitchers from 2021 and another survey that includes any player who had a plate appearance in 2021 (not to include pitchers in this survey) is in order. From there, MLB needs to do some real research into who is their audience. Personally, I would be surprised if 5% of the players wanted robo umpires. I have no idea if gamers or those who love video games now make up the bulk of people spending money on the MLB product and would like to see more technology, like robo umpires, in the game. Perhaps MLB needs to know though.

I do know that there are a number of people who watch and listen to MLB baseball games and go to MLB baseball games and also actually enjoy watching Town Ball or Legion as much as the Twins. Some of these people also greatly enjoy numbers and analytics as well. I also know that a number of people love the analytics of baseball but don't listen to the games on the radio and also don't particularly enjoy watching the games, but do enjoy discussions, blogs, and the numbers related to the game. It really doesn't matter what singular thoughts you or I have, but it is important what the larger group thinks. Baseball needs to know the customer or it risks losing ground for the entertainment buck.