MLB Has an Optics Problem with Umpires and Strike Zone Displays

[Nick Nelson]

Bad umpiring performances have always been part of the game of baseball, but these days, fans are forced to have the extent and impact of botched strike zones constantly shoved in our faces. It detracts greatly from the viewing experience, and sooner or later, the league is going need to make a decision on a sensible path forward.

Image courtesy of Jesse Johnson-USA TODAY Sports

I watched a majority of Saturday's game against the Guardians from one of my favorite vantage points at Target Field, standing at the rail behind the lower-bowl home plate sections. Provided you don't mind being on your feet, it's one of the best views you can get in the park without paying for expensive seats.

What's especially nice about watching from here is that you can keep an eye on the TVs mounted beneath the overhang for fans in the back rows and on the concourse – great for catching a quick zoomed-in replay of what you just witnessed live. This was helpful, for instance, when I was trying to parse out exactly what happened on this wild play at second base. This kind of stuff is what makes watching and dissecting baseball great.

Unfortunately, Saturday's game also provided a glaring glimpse of something that is increasingly hampering the quality of the baseball-viewing experience: a persistent, precision-based strike zone display in broadcasts, paired with home plate umpires who are too often far from precise in their calls.

As Brennan Miller bumbled his way through this game, repeatedly botching calls that overwhelmingly went against the Twins, all fans in my vicinity would glance to the screen, only to have these misses confirmed over and over again. For Major League Baseball, it's just a really odd way to present your product, placing shortcomings of officials and their pivotal impact front-and-center for viewers, to the point where it sort of overrides the rest of the action.

When it comes to the topic of electronic strike zones, I personally tend to lean a little more traditional. I actually don't mind the idea of a somewhat subjective (yet consistent) strike zone, and I enjoy the human element playing a role in guiding the game. I'm cool with rewarding pitchers for executing really well, or catchers for framing the ball, and with these skills bending the margins of the zone to some extent. 

The thing is, there is no real subjectivity allowed for when you've got the strike zone overlay on the screen depicting balls and strikes as a matter of fact. When the circle is outside the box, it's clearly going to be perceived as a ball, and a missed call if the ump says otherwise. It's black and white. 

What's worse: the strike zones superimposed on broadcasts are not always even accurate, and can actually undermine the umpires when they are NOT getting it wrong. I'm not one to defend Angel Hernandez (perhaps the single greatest walking argument for robot umps), but he was getting roasted by people on Sunday for calling a strike against Giancarlo Stanton that was ... definitely a strike? Ah, but it did not land within the static strike zone overlay that barely reaches the bottom of his belt.

Maybe I'm overly sensitive to this, because I watch a team that takes pitches and strikes out so very often, and seems to get bitten by these borderline calls with extreme frequency. For me, the annoying experience of watching Saturday's game and brooding over nonstop missed calls has come to feel somewhat routine. But at a broader level, I've long been bothered by this disconnect in the way MLB presents its product, at a time when the league is trying hard to win new fans. It's getting to be a little much to take.

If Major League Baseball wants to position the strike zone as this absolute and enforceable thing, then why not just implement the automated balls and strikes (ABS) system and do away with the disjointed viewing experience. If, conversely, the league wants us to believe the strike zone is dynamic, fluid and subjective – thus validating the ongoing existence of human umpires – then broadcasts should stop giving the opposite impression. At the very least, the superimposed zone could better reflect the way umps are actually taught to call balls and strikes (or the way the Hawk-Eye tracking system measures them), as opposed to the uniform rectangle shape we mostly get now.

One thing that seems uncontroversial: If we're gonna keep presenting the strike zone so prominently, it's past time to give managers the ability to challenge ball/strike calls in some capacity. Making the players, coaches and all the fans feel powerless while watching a disastrously butchered umpiring job like we saw from Miller on Saturday completely alter the course of the game is not good for anyone. It's certainly not the kind of thing that's going to attract more viewers to MLB.

What's your feeling on the way Major League Baseball is handling and presenting the strike zone? Do the disjointed optics of these broadcasts bother you as much as me? I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments.

View full article

[bean5302]

Baseball is entertainment. Spreadsheets are not entertaining to most people. Computers are not entertaining to most people. Sports fans love to blame the referees and umpires, and bad calls are especially engaging with the audience. A computer determining borderline calls is a disaster in terms of fan engagement. The only time umpires would be a problem would be if a team consistently was victimized by bad calls throughout a a full season. Also... how many of you know the names "Joe West" and "Angel Hernandez"? That's fan engagement, even if you think it's for the wrong reason.

I would be for a challenge similar to the minors, but no need to announce it and the ball/strike call should be instant. The ump should just have a button to press and the call gets spoken to him. Walk off to the side a tick, then make the ball or strike call from the side of the plate. All the fans will pick up and know what's going on quickly.

Say what you will about Manfred, but almost every rule change he's made over the past couple years has benefitted fans. The game is already so much better now than it was.

[Linus]

I e been saying this for years. What business / industry wants to prominently display one of the biggest weaknesses of said industry?  At a minimum MLB should require the box or technology they use be the one superimposed on the TV screen. It’s pretty unfair to the umpires that they get roasted on pitches that are in fact correct calls. 

[USAFChief]

This is a great piece of writing, Nick.

I'm also  vaguely opposed to an electronic strike zone, but the situation has gotten out of control via the little box on TV. It's all anyone wants to talk about.

MLB got pushed into a corner and now it's just a matter of time for an electronic strike zone. 

Which, BTW, won't stop fans bitching about the strike zone. 

The most egregious thing Saturday was it appeared, to me at least, as the Wallner K was intentional by the home plate ump. He knew the pitch was a ball, but was tired of the complaints and was letting Wallner and the Twins know it. That can't happen.

[Road trip]

Calling balls and strikes perfectly is not possible for the human eye.  I've done it many times at the youth level.

I can live with blown calls that are at the top of the zone plus/minus an inch or two.  It's a judgement call based on the varying height of the batter.  The same is somewhat true on the low strike.

The outside corner is simply a "best guess" if we are being honest.  Calls are blown here all the time because umpires set up on the inside corner.  It is physiologically impossible to catch that angle perfectly.

What should never happen, ever, is a badly missed call on this inside corner.  This happened on consecutive pitches to Wallner on Saturday.  It was umpiring malpractice of the first rank, and it happens too often.  I turned the game off shortly after that at bat.  I didn't need the tv overlay box to see how bad those calls were.

Yes, MLB should fix this.  I'm quite ready for robo umps calling balls and strikes.  It will be a better and fairer game, will cause the game to move more quickly, and will end the perceived injustice that so many fans nurse regarding ball and strike calls.

[Alex Schieferdecker]

Absolutely agree and it's not just umpires in baseball. In every sport, fans have access to better tools than the officials do when it comes to making calls. The only difference is that officials have a better grasp of the rulebook.

Not to stretch an analogy too far as well, but we see the same thing with ubiquitous camera phones, where people in all types of jobs can be captured doing them badly. But the repercussions of bad work are rarely witnessed, discipline or accountability is not visible and sometimes context is not included that would explain the situation better. This imbalance between transparency on one end and opacity on the other extremely bad for public trust in a wide span of fields.

[Alex]

I'm not sure of the numbers, but it tends to feel like umpires' missed calls favor the pitcher.  They tend to call more pitches outside the zone strikes than pitches inside the zone balls.   Even if it's 50/50, that still benefits the pitchers since a call that is mis-labeled a strike is more valuable than a call mis-labeled a ball.

That said, I think with as hard as hitting has become, a more consistent strike zone would benefit the game for a lot of reasons, and I hope it would also benefit hitters to provide more action in the game, even a little bit.

[JD-TWINS]

34 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

This is a great piece of writing, Nick.

I'm also  vaguely opposed to an electronic strike zone, but the situation has gotten out of control via the little box on TV. It's all anyone wants to talk about.

MLB got pushed into a corner and now it's just a matter of time for an electronic strike zone. 

Which, BTW, won't stop fans bitching about the strike zone. 

The most egregious thing Saturday was it appeared, to me at least, as the Wallner K was intentional by the home plate ump. He knew the pitch was a ball, but was tired of the complaints and was letting Wallner and the Twins know it. That can't happen.

Unfortunately, it can happen! It has happened for past few decades - probably going back to the start of the game? Umpires push themselves into the game, demanding respect. Not unlike “old school” approach in refereeing many sports. …….when I played basketball in the ‘70’s if one didn’t raise their hand clearly after being whistled for a foul, it could be a Technical. Things have changed!! Umps & Refs egos have not…..,they seem much more sensitive!

I understand your point. Seems to me, there is already a system…..just needs further validation. Am pretty sure the “auto - zone” has been around in the minors at certain times for more than just one season. Seems to be a matter of time.

I too prefer the human element, until there’s a terrible Ump that consistently struggles (Saturday) - then it’s a 180 to automation or at least some blend.

[mikelink45]

I love the article.  But put me down for the electronic zone - no hesitation.  Get it right and move on.  It is silly to want to have umpires determining their own version of a strike zone.  Unless you are a Greg Maddux who knew how to use this to advantage it is just a frustration.  I want the game decided by hits, strikes and errors, not umpires. I remember the adage that the best umpire, judge, referee is the one you do not hear about.  It is like the poor linemen who are only named when caught holding.

I do not have another place to put this, but Ken Rosenthal had an intriguing take on pitching which is outside the strike zone and worth considering too - maybe it goes with my Maddux comment - 

"The hyperfocus on velocity and spin, he said, was achieving the desired results. Pitchers have never been as nasty as they are today, and teams win by pushing them to their physical limits.

"Pitchers might experience spikes in performance. Their respective clubs might draw the accompanying benefits. But no one can possibly say the current trend is good for the game.

"Ask the Braves about their World Series aspirations without Strider, whom they signed to a six-year, $75 million deal in Oct. 2022. Ask the Guardians about their postseason chances without Bieber, whose $13.125 million salary accounts for nearly 15 percent of their payroll. Ask the Marlins about even trying to be respectable without Pérez, who also is about to join their staff ace and biggest long-term investment, Sandy Alcantara, on the seemingly endless list of pitchers to undergo elbow-ligament repair surgery."

"But the entire sport should hit the pause button.  Pause on bowing to the Driveline gods and all of the technology and data that make pitchers better but not necessarily healthier. Pause on rewarding 120 innings of max effort from starting pitchers when 180 from command-control specialists might prove even more valuable."

[nicksaviking]

Back in the day umpires purposefully gave good experienced pitchers (that generally being pitchers too expensive for the Twins to afford) a bigger strikezone. Now the umpires only errantly expand the strikezone against the Twins, likely due to the perception that they strike out a lot. 

I don't like the Twins current hitting philosophy, but they shouldn't be penalized doubly simply because of incompetent or spiteful umpiring; umpires 100% should not be influencing game plans. Considering it takes an act of god to get rid of bad umpires at the MLB level, they need to move forward with the automated strikezone. There have been a bunch of changes to the game recently, and while there was lots of consternation prior to implementation, most of the changes have been accepted, this one would too.

[4twinsJA]

I was in favor of a challenge system. Then, I watched a minor league game that used the challenge system and did not like it. Slowed the game down, first 3 innings had too many challenges. May be a learning curve for players and coaches on when to use, umpire was correct most of time. 

I am in favor of the electronic strike system in some form. MLB needs to eliminate the obvious missed calls. When a ball in 2-3 inches in the strike zone and called a ball or pitch 2-3 inches out of the zone and called a strike, need to clean those up.

[wsnydes]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

This is a great piece of writing, Nick.

I'm also  vaguely opposed to an electronic strike zone, but the situation has gotten out of control via the little box on TV. It's all anyone wants to talk about.

MLB got pushed into a corner and now it's just a matter of time for an electronic strike zone. 

Which, BTW, won't stop fans bitching about the strike zone. 

The most egregious thing Saturday was it appeared, to me at least, as the Wallner K was intentional by the home plate ump. He knew the pitch was a ball, but was tired of the complaints and was letting Wallner and the Twins know it. That can't happen.

I've against an automated zone as well, but it has gotten to a point where its really hard to argue against it.  I still enjoy the human aspects of the game, but with pitchers throwing harder and harder and with more movement, there is a better way to do it.  Some of these guys have such crazy stuff that I sometimes find myself wondering how some umps are as accurate as they are.  

[Schmoeman5]

It was 1 game. I did have a slight problem with Sat game. But to me it's much ado about nothing. In fact fans embrace it as a built in excuse for losing.  There is no way mlb singles out the Twins. Cleveland is preferred over Minnesota? It was even suggested that umps were in cahoots Ala the NBA and gambling on games by a poster in Sat game thread. Twins hitters are not performing right now. It surely isn't because of the home plate umpire. No to robo umps. 

[Doctor Gast]

I am 100% in favor of an electronic strike zone calling. I don't think that too many hockey fans would like to go back to a human calling goals instead of the electronic goal indicator. What is most important is unbiased fairness. Pitcher & batter enter the box knowing exactly what the strike zone is, relieves the pressure from the ump so they focus on other things, speeds up the game by avoiding player/ coach confrontations. I don't want a game to be determined by blown calls.

[jorgenswest]

If the electronic strike zone used in AAA last year is the model, count me out. It was not 3D and not the strike zone. That ABS called strikes solely based on where the ball crosses the midpoint of the plate, 8.5 inches from the front and the back. A pitcher with more movement will more often have a ball move out of the zone before the midpoint or move into the zone after the midpoint. They need a human to see what the machines are not seeing. Overall that ABS was a disaster and not well received. It was also not consistent between parks. It changed the run scoring environment. The tweak in September was to simply make it larger rather than to make it accurate. Instead of trying to model the strike zone they tried to create a zone that 

The first move is to get that rectangle off our screens. There are broadcasters who speak of it that thing as anlways accurate. It’s not. If you only take a 2D cross section of the plate to represent the 3D zone it will not be accurate. I think a geometrically more accurate 2D slice of strike in a 3D zone would be closer to an oval.

Here is a quote from Morgan Sword, MLB executive vice president of operations

Quote

“The two-dimensional zone has minimized the number of pitches that feel wrong to people, particularly when it’s at the middle of the plate because you’re not catching quite as many of those breaking balls down and also those balls that clip the back of the plate,” Sword said. “We like the two-dimensional nature of it. 

“It also allows whatever zone we use on the field to match the representations of the zone that we provide to fans and players and coaches and everybody else. But the specifics of what two-dimensional shape you use and what the dimensions of that shape are, I think are still in flux.”

Do you really want them to change the major league zone based on what feels wrong to people?

[danielp19653]

One other thing that the current situation seems to be out of alignment for me is that AAA has the automatic zone (or challenges if its a certain set of days because its baseball and there always have to be weird rules) and young players coming up seem to have a very good idea of the strike zone because its far more consistent in the minors. Then you watch Wallner and Julien and Lewis all struggle with the inconsistencies in the MLB when they take pitches that they know are balls and have been for most of their professional careers turn ambiguous. It's been in the minors long enough I think the MLB needs to decide to bring it up or ditch it entirely. No sense having a game called in a completely different way for all these players in a league that's supposed to be preparing them for the MLB. 

[Steve Lein]

I have often been more on the side of having the human element, but we are getting to the point now with the technology where we can see the negative impacts on games.

I still don't think the ABS system is reliable enough, and from articles I've read talking with MLB executives and the companies that make the technology they acknowledge this to be the case (i.e.: it's not more accurate than umpires are), but it is getting closer and closer.

I am actually a big fan of one of the challenge systems that has been used in some leagues (I don't think triple-A is using this version, yet. The Futures Game had it), which is the hitter or catcher makes an immediate challenge. This doesn't slow the game down at all. The ump has to wait like 5 seconds for confirmation, and off they go again. I think they are allowing 3 challenges per game, but I'd rather see something like 3 strikes (incorrect challenges) and you're out (I actually think 2 would be a better number for this, but it doesn't fit my my baseball-themed description 🤣).

[jorgenswest]

1 minute ago, danielp19653 said:

One other thing that the current situation seems to be out of alignment for me is that AAA has the automatic zone (or challenges if its a certain set of days because its baseball and there always have to be weird rules) and young players coming up seem to have a very good idea of the strike zone because its far more consistent in the minors. Then you watch Wallner and Julien and Lewis all struggle with the inconsistencies in the MLB when they take pitches that they know are balls and have been for most of their professional careers turn ambiguous. It's been in the minors long enough I think the MLB needs to decide to bring it up or ditch it entirely. No sense having a game called in a completely different way for all these players in a league that's supposed to be preparing them for the MLB. 

I agree that it is different and not helpful in making the transition to the majors. I don’t believe it has been consistent across their minor league experience though. Last year minor league executives reported that it was not the same from park to park. They also reported of the trouble ABS had adjusting to the individual strike zones players. Moreover, the strike zone was changed from 22 to 23 then again later during the season in 23. Changing the strike zone three times within a year is anything but consistent.

[Elite Benchwarmer]

Terrific writing.  The league needs to identify and implement the most accurate ball/strike system that doesn't significantly delay the game.  Hopefully, the options being tested over the past 3-4 years have provided sufficient data to get this implemented ASAP (meaning 2025).

 

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

1 hour ago, Schmoeman5 said:

There is no way mlb singles out the Twins. Cleveland is preferred over Minnesota?

That's not the argument - that any single team is being singled out. That game on Saturday clearly favored Cleveland over Minnesota in a major way, regardless of their intentions to do so.

MLB has the ability to remove game-altering calls like this and many more that happen every single day. It's a no-brainer. 

[Guest]

Well done.  Get the strike zone diagram right.  Really get it right if the game adopts automatic ball/strike technology.

Popham's strategy of having hitters wait for a good pitch will result in him spending a lot of game time in the clubhouse this year....

[ashbury]

2 hours ago, USAFChief said:

The most egregious thing Saturday was it appeared, to me at least, as the Wallner K was intentional by the home plate ump. He knew the pitch was a ball, but was tired of the complaints and was letting Wallner and the Twins know it. That can't happen.

I don't mostly disagree, but I'm a little surprised at the line you draw here.  Umpires controlling their domain is as old as the game itself.  Treat the ump with respect and you'll get a fairly called game.  Show up the ump in any of various ways, expect a few calls to go against you.  Players catch on fast, to this system - the smart ones anyway.  This is about as far away from the analytical side of the spectrum as you can get, but to my own surprise (a bit) I don't get too worked up about this.

Live And Don't Learn, Mr. Wallner.

[umterp23]

2 hours ago, USAFChief said:

This is a great piece of writing, Nick.

I'm also  vaguely opposed to an electronic strike zone, but the situation has gotten out of control via the little box on TV. It's all anyone wants to talk about.

MLB got pushed into a corner and now it's just a matter of time for an electronic strike zone. 

Which, BTW, won't stop fans bitching about the strike zone. 

The most egregious thing Saturday was it appeared, to me at least, as the Wallner K was intentional by the home plate ump. He knew the pitch was a ball, but was tired of the complaints and was letting Wallner and the Twins know it. That can't happen.

Chief you are correct about Wallner.  In my playing days back in college, our coaching staff told us if you complain to an ump during your at bat on a strike call and don't get tossed for it, you better be swinging at anything close.  Right or Wrong, umpire will make a point.  Our pitchers were told to not throw a strike in that situation and you would get the call.  One of those unwritten rules of the game.  Only thing is Wallner should have protested a bit more or Rocco should have had the guts to protect his guys vs the bench coach getting the heave.  I enjoyed my 1st ever game in person there on Saturday, outcome not so much, but the stadium and refreshments were top notch.  Kudos to Twins and the locals who get to enjoy the atmosphere.

 

[Trov]

I agree that if MLB is not going to shift to a robo ump, they need to work with broadcast crews and get the actual zone that the MLB uses to test the accuracy of the umpires.  I do agree, more so on the high or low calls, the zones on the TV are not correct, but the inside and outside should be as the plate is the same size.  The calls on Wallner were not excusable in my opinion. 

MLB will be going to robo umps, they are using them in minors, and you would hope the umps in the games were it is all robo are still making calls in their heads to determine if they were right or not.  However, if they are not, the training of umps are getting reduced as there are several games where they do not even make calls at AAA and only some where they make them and get challenged. 

It is also harder for the players.  It is not surprising to see guys like Wallner and Julien strike out a ton watching pitches on the edges, that our screens say are balls off the plate, but get rung up.  They have been training for a few years with the robo umps then they get asked to come up to MLB level where umps decide the strike zone. 

The most frustrating thing for hitters, and for most fans I would think, is that the zone changes based on the count.  Torii Hunter when he broadcasted games would say on 3-0 the strike call is automatic unless the pitch was so bad the ump had no choice but to call it ball.  When you watch games you see that.  This is frustrating for players because the same pitch they took for ball one is now strike one later in at bat. 

For the people that defend the umps for how hard it is to be right, and they get like 90% to 95% right they ignore the accuracy of the close calls.  I read an article a few years ago that reviewed the umps, using the same date MLB uses to judge umps, and the non-boarderline calls umps were right like 99.5%.  Those are the calls either no where close to strike or right down the middle.  But when you got closer to the edges of the zone, the umps were closer to 50% of the time.  What made matters worse was the count affected how the ump would call it, and if they just called it one way, they would flip it the next time more often.  Umps will get fooled by the pitcher and the hitter.  If the pitcher was known for good command they would get good calls, if the hitter was known for a good eye they would get good calls.

I am looking forward to the robo ump so the hitter, and pitcher will know the strike zone.  I will agree until that time, the zone on the TV just makes fans not like umps even more because we see the "wrong" call on tv in big moments and get upset.  

[USAFChief]

23 minutes ago, ashbury said:

I don't mostly disagree, but I'm a little surprised at the line you draw here.  Umpires controlling their domain is as old as the game itself.  Treat the ump with respect and you'll get a fairly called game.  Show up the ump in any of various ways, expect a few calls to go against you.  Players catch on fast, to this system - the smart ones anyway.  This is about as far away from the analytical side of the spectrum as you can get, but to my own surprise (a bit) I don't get too worked up about this.

Live And Don't Learn, Mr. Wallner.

I rarely disagree with you Ash, but in this case I think you're off base.

Umpires should never, ever make calls to influence behavior.  That equals intentionally influencing the outcome. That's something that should get an umpire suspended and fined.

 

[h2oface]

I guess I give fans more credit than Nick. If the box is placed wrong by the broadcast, we can actually take that into account, and still see where the ball crosses the plane of view, and tell if the call was right or wrong. It is not 3 D, but we are not stupid. (That doesn't mean is shouldn't be improved and be adjusted correctly for each batter's height - top and bottom, which is the only thing in question, not the inside and outside edges, which is always the same.) Avid baseball fans know the strike zone. Casual fans, maybe not so much. The system used to grade the umps should be the system used to call the balls and strikes. It will be far better than what is used now, and it will just get better.

Umpires are not the human element. The players are. Or should be. They deserve the correct close calls the most. The perfect low and outside corner for a strike. The ball that is close but the batter is talented enough to hold up. That is excellence in baseball, and that deserves to be awarded, and not destroyed and robbed by the guy that is just guessing, and doing the best he can, which is worse than a better option.

[h2oface]

4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

........The most egregious thing Saturday was it appeared, to me at least, as the Wallner K was intentional by the home plate ump. He knew the pitch was a ball, but was tired of the complaints and was letting Wallner and the Twins know it. That can't happen.

Exactly. It can't, but it does so very often. Human pride and power. That should never happen from an umpire, but as long as they are allowed to guess at the balls and strikes, it will, and far to much - chest out, stepping in, doubling down even if wrong to show "I am the power". A correct call should never never never involve emotion and revenge, conscious or subconscious.

[h2oface]

2 hours ago, ashbury said:

I don't mostly disagree, but I'm a little surprised at the line you draw here.  Umpires controlling their domain is as old as the game itself.  Treat the ump with respect and you'll get a fairly called game.  Show up the ump in any of various ways, expect a few calls to go against you.  Players catch on fast, to this system - the smart ones anyway.  This is about as far away from the analytical side of the spectrum as you can get, but to my own surprise (a bit) I don't get too worked up about this.

Live And Don't Learn, Mr. Wallner.

Many managers/coaches in all sports, and players, too, also feel that by expressing your concern in a notorious manner will get you the next questionable call in your favor "to even it out", and many times, it seems to work - just the opposite of the behavior in question making calls go against you. Go figure. The common factor? Emotion is involved to make a correct and accurate call, and that is the main problem and must be removed.

[bean5302]

39 minutes ago, Trov said:

...But when you got closer to the edges of the zone, the umps were closer to 50% of the time...

Are you sure the computer is right down to the millimeter? Even down to a centimeter? You'd expect calls at the very edges of the zone to get closer and closer to 50/50, As you see here, the missed strikes (called balls) were within millimeters of being a true ball as recorded by the equipment. If the equipment is off by 1 cm (totally believable) then those were good calls. The low-center "ball" call was also within millimeters of being a true ball as recorded by the equipment.

Miller did a really lousy job, but I don't have a problem with 3 of those balls as I don't think equipment used would be any more accurate.
 

[Schmoeman5]

1 hour ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

That's not the argument - that any single team is being singled out. That game on Saturday clearly favored Cleveland over Minnesota in a major way, regardless of their intentions to do so.

MLB has the ability to remove game-altering calls like this and many more that happen every single day. It's a no-brainer. 

Game altering? You're assuming that. The Twins players were missing plenty of pitches in the SZ. Could the bigger strike zone have induced Twins hitters to swing at balls they normally wouldn't? Perhaps. The comments that are made, is that it's a mlb conspiracy singling out the Twins. And listening to Morneau. He's right in the sense that a 2-1 count is different than a 1-2 count or whatever it is at the time. Still. You guys all want perfect. Even with automated strike zone you'll never get perfect. 125 years of baseball. And you want this.  Good for you. And how is it going to be better? That's my opinion. You're entitled to yours.