Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    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

    Twins Video

    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.

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    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. 

    The problem is there are no consequeces for people who are demonstratively literally terrible at their job.  Remove (fire) one repeatedly game altering ump.  The rest will get the message.

    MLB has many very good umpires and a handful that are utterly atrocious.  It is MLB's fault for not getting a handle on the umpires union.  MLB's inability to fire bad umpires is the major problem here, not technology.

    Technology isn't going away.  Uniformity would help the viewer, but MLB has taken the stance they do not want to share the technology on how they enforce the rules (ie the strike zone) because of said umpires union.
     
     

    33 minutes ago, Schmoeman5 said:

    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.

    By definition missed calls alter the game. Even moreseo, when umps decide to call a ball a strike because a batter called them out for missing a previous call (this happens all the time) it completely changes the at bat which changes the flow of the game, whether you'd like to acknowledge it or not. 

    I'm not sure why you're so dead set on conflating two completely separate arguments. Yes, the Twins could have batted better and won the game - but that's not the argument here. You're bringing that up and amplifying a conspiracy that one person said in a Twins Daily game thread for what reason?

    Yes, I want perfection. Everyone should! Even though the automated zone isn't perfect, it is without a doubt better than what we have now and it's extraordinarily easy for MLB to implement it. One of the most obvious no brainers out there.

    It will be better because we wouldn't have to deal with crap like this from Angel Hernandez any more. Which isn't a controversial thing to say.

     

    50 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

    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.

     

    Agree with this completely, as an active umpire myself.  I'm all for permanently throwing out anyone who can be proven to do it on purpose. Unfortunately, the human element is undefeated and game conditions can sometimes effect us without even being aware. It's something I'm always reminding myself, don't make a second mistake to correct the first mistake.

    As a coaching point, it's probably a fair strategy, knowing the reality of the situations.

    Before I get anywhere near support for robots, I need to see a couple things first. Nevermind that I have my doubts about the technology.

    The first and most important item is to get everyone looking at the same thing. The Fox box is different from the ESPN box is different from the Ballys box is different from the MLB official box is different from the umpire scorecards box. Our current view is so skewed by a random square a guy in the production truck drew that it's basically impossible to know how accurate the edges are. Gross misses are obvious but that's part of my second point.

    I, and many others have shared the umpire scorecard from the Cleveland game. It's fun to talk about but means absolutely nothing when evaluating that umpire. Just the fact that we think a square drawn on paper gives us an idea of how the ump performed is an indicator of how distorted our view is. Jose Ramirez is 5'9, Matt Wallner 6'4. Their boxes are far different but here we are, damn ump was outside the box. Do any TV feeds adjust the box for Altuve or Judge? Not that I'm aware of. We can't discuss this reasonably without looking at the correct information.

    My second thing is we need to know there is a performance review standard happening. I'm the first to say discipline should be private but the longer Angel Hernandez working playoff games the more we can assume the discipline is lacking. We should be seeing young new guys all the time, with young fresh eyes. The human element is valuable, even if it let's us down from time to time.

    36 minutes ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

    By definition missed calls alter the game. Even moreseo, when umps decide to call a ball a strike because a batter called them out for missing a previous call (this happens all the time) it completely changes the at bat which changes the flow of the game, whether you'd like to acknowledge it or not. 

    I'm not sure why you're so dead set on conflating two completely separate arguments. Yes, the Twins could have batted better and won the game - but that's not the argument here. You're bringing that up and amplifying a conspiracy that one person said in a Twins Daily game thread for what reason?

    Yes, I want perfection. Everyone should! Even though the automated zone isn't perfect, it is without a doubt better than what we have now and it's extraordinarily easy for MLB to implement it. One of the most obvious no brainers out there.

    It will be better because we wouldn't have to deal with crap like this from Angel Hernandez any more. Which isn't a controversial thing to say.

     

    I did acknowledge that. Can you comprehend? Pulling out Angel Hernandez. That's funny. And for someone who complains about poaching posts you sure have a habit of doing it. You're a I know everything guy. It's not one person's comment that I was amplifying. It's a constant on the game threads by quite a few posters. To the point of being ridiculous.

    Yes the home plate umpiring has been going downhill for quite some time.  Saturdays "performance" was a joke.  Quite honestly that umpire should have been suspended or demoted.  Hopefully someone talked to him about his game calling.  22 missed strikes with 19 against the Twins is not very good.  However bad the Twins offensive performance has been I find it equally as bad as people blaming wallner and other twin hitters for the terrible calls.  After watching a lot of games around the league the home plate umpiring is a big topic around baseball.  Right up there with all the injuries to pitchers.

    The only problem I have with this piece is that the various boxes are not new.  They've been on-screen for about 23 years and have gotten better over time, so why is it only a problem now? Is it because we can perhaps do better? Then let's do that: adjust the zones to match batters, share that common definition and require official broadcasters to follow it or take it off the screen. It might take a year or two to get the technical kinks out, but it shouldn't be that hard.

    Our standards are so high these days that it's beginning to reduce the joy in the game. An occasional poor performance by a rookie umpire should kind of be expected, yet this one's being vilified like he's some sort of Eric Gregg, who essentially gave away a World Series game while the world watched (without the K Zone.)  I personally would like the human element to remain in the game, but honestly there are so many guys throwing so hard today that I think an automated zone is the best way to ensure fairness and repeatability.  And even if it isn't perfect right out of the box where a Jose Altuve might always have to defend a larger strike zone than an Aaron Judge, he might enjoy the consistency on the corners. Youngsters are already there, waiting for the calls to even out. I would like to see the step taken.

    3 hours ago, h2oface said:

    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.

    The key is to get your point across without "showing up" Blue.  Make your point, get some satisfaction maybe.  But show up Blue, fuggedaboutit.

    A bit of a fine art, but also common sense, and I think most folks who work between the lines figure things out.  Of course this is only my own opinion, from the outside looking in.

    4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

    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.

     

    Maybe to a large degree our disagreement is over what "is" versus what "should be".  Further nuance as to maintaining authority could be a good discussion for the next time I see you at AFL or wherever.

    50 minutes ago, jimmyc said:

    How does a former Umpire get away with saying that the umpires actually call an egg-shaped strike zone?  My mind wanted to explode on that one!

    A 2D slice that is a representation of the 3D zone will geometrically look more oval. Pitches in the center horizontally center particularly at the top will have more space to drop in or out of the zone. Pitches on the corners don’t have that space as there is a better chance they will move laterally out of the strike zone.

     

    9 hours ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

    I struggled watching that Saturday game also.  I have several comments/opinions...

    1. No to coach's challenges.  The game is already too slow.

    2. Yes to an auto-call based on the box.  I recall hearing they were experimenting with a mike in the ump's ear telling him the call.  I like that approach.

    3. If Bally is going to show the box, make it match the box that the ump is using.  I recall reading that they get graded by a MLB box which differs.

    4. I cannot tell, but does the box change based on the batter?  It should be different especially for the giants like Judge.  I recall Bill Veek having a tiny guy (can't recall his name) who drew a walk every time because of his supper small strike zone based on his size difference.  That's back to the days when the strike zone varied based on the player's letters (or arm pits) to their knees.  Not sure but I doubt that the box changes based on the batter.

    OK, time to get off my soap box.

    Veeck's guy was Eddie Gaedel. 1 plate appearance. Career OBP...1.000.

    Sorry Nick, but when the technology is there and better.... you don't just decide to 'ignore the man behind the curtain' and get rid of live strike zone results because the optics are bad.

    The optics are bad because home plate umpires calling balls/strikes is an antiquated system.

    The ultimate transition to automated strike zone calls in MLB is a question of  'when' and not an 'if'... 

     

     

     

    I watched a St. Paul Saints game last year with the robo umps and it was refreshing not to constantly see batters looking back at the ump or hear the chirping from the benches about a call.  The home plate ump had a receiver on the back of her belt that relayed the call to her and then she made it.   It was fluid and the game went along smoothly.  The technology is there, why not use it.

    I agree the Bally box isn't completely accurate. It is however close. I don't mind seeing an ump consistently calling a slightly wider or taller or shorter zone than the box shows. But in the last few years that consistency has gotten much worse. They need to do something to either help the umps or get rid of the bad ones. Pitchers are throwing harder than ever, with more movement than ever. If the umps can't keep up with them (and I can see why) then its time to make a change.

    5 hours ago, nclahammer said:

    I watched a St. Paul Saints game last year with the robo umps and it was refreshing not to constantly see batters looking back at the ump or hear the chirping from the benches about a call.  The home plate ump had a receiver on the back of her belt that relayed the call to her and then she made it.   It was fluid and the game went along smoothly.  The technology is there, why not use it.

    The players that have come up with the robo umps/challenge calls really know the strike zone, even better than some of the umps. I'm curious, are the new umps that come up through the system also better at knowing the strike zone? Or are they worse because they relied on robo umps too much? Just curious.

    Your take above is the same thing I see in tennis. They run the replay. The ball is in or it is out and not a single person complains. Every TV network should get the same strike zone template for each batter. The differing zones for size of batter is the thing that makes it different than tennis.

    Nick has it nailed that regardless of the reality baseball has a perception problem regarding umpiring, especially with balls and strikes. while no one expects 100% accuracy, the egregious calls really stand out. (Ed Julien's experience against the Dodgers last season stands out, when he was rung up on a "strike" call that was clearly outside, confirmed by aerial view cams, and so dreadful that the Dodgers broadcast crew started laughing about it.) Those are the ones that you just can't have happen.

    The broadcast box being out of synch with how the umps are graded is a real issue, because the broadcast box is not going away. It's an innovation that fans like and would complain about loudly if MLB somehow managed to bully the broadcasts into dumping it, and that would lead to a bigger perception problem: that MLB did it to cover something up. If they can get it consistently closer to what umps are graded on it would certainly help.

    Overall the umps are pretty good, even if there are some holdovers who act as if they're who people came to see. (considering training for officials in every sport they usually mention that your best performances are ones where no one remembers you were there, this is a bit odd...but weird umps like Ron Luciano (who was actually very skilled) did make the game more fun) But if MLB can't get a handle on this the cries for the electronic zone are only going to get louder. I'm increasingly ready, because I'm sick of talking about an ump having a shocker.




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...