Baseball..

One of the advantages of the current broadcast technology of baseball games is that it can show how good or bad the umpires are at calling balls and strikes. Maybe roboump next year?

It's an idea that's been floated around for some time. How different would the Padre/Yankee World Series have been with this tech?

I still like real umps/refs. The game of Baseball is not perfect and this tech would change the feel.of the game. Imagine Earl Weaver or Billy Martin trying to argue with an ai-ump.. the need for catchers who can call a good game and frame a pitch would be a thing of the past. No Alomar or Yeager needed..

The only tweaking they should make is the pace of the game and they are working on that.
 
It's an idea that's been floated around for some time. How different would the Padre/Yankee World Series have been with this tech?

I still like real umps/refs. The game of Baseball is not perfect and this tech would change the feel.of the game. Imagine Earl Weaver or Billy Martin trying to argue with an ai-ump.. the need for catchers who can call a good game and frame a pitch would be a thing of the past. No Alomar or Yeager needed..

The only tweaking they should make is the pace of the game and they are working on that.
It may have been floated around for years, but now it appears that we have usable technology. I would like a system that doesn't call balls and strikes directly, but just lets the umpire know if the pitch crossed through the strike zone. He could still make the call himself based on other factors.

I know umpires are rated by MLB and the league offices (that's how we get the supposed best in the post-season games) but I don't know if they use the current technology to run stats on an umpire's ball and strike calls pitch by pitch.
 
It may have been floated around for years, but now it appears that we have usable technology. I would like a system that doesn't call balls and strikes directly, but just lets the umpire know if the pitch crossed through the strike zone. He could still make the call himself based on other factors.

I know umpires are rated by MLB and the league offices (that's how we get the supposed best in the post-season games) but I don't know if they use the current technology to run stats on an umpire's ball and strike calls pitch by pitch.
Yea I've thought the same thing. Give the Ump an ear piece that sends an audible tone signaling a strike. But still not a fan of that. Each ump has his zone and pitchers know that.. just not a fan of the expanded strike zone that guys like Maddox were given. Some of those strikes were six inches off the plate.
 
Yea I've thought the same thing. Give the Ump an ear piece that sends an audible tone signaling a strike. But still not a fan of that. Each ump has his zone and pitchers know that.. just not a fan of the expanded strike zone that guys like Maddox were given. Some of those strikes were six inches off the plate.
If each ump had his zone would be ok if they were consistent, but the broadcast technology shows that not to be the case.
 
Another robo-ump application might be checked-swings. As it stands now, a "swing" is defined as an "attempt" to hit the ball. There is no definition for a checked-swing. Some umpires go by the extent the hips rotate; some by the extent that the bat moves; and some just go by "feel." My proposal is that a "swing" occurs when any part of the bat enters into any area above the plate. Any robo-ump could detect that pretty easily.

In all ball-strike calls and checked-swing calls, I would have the electronic system be the correct call by default, and also have the system announce the call to the crowd. The field umpire would have the right to overrule the system.
 
Another robo-ump application might be checked-swings. As it stands now, a "swing" is defined as an "attempt" to hit the ball. There is no definition for a checked-swing. Some umpires go by the extent the hips rotate; some by the extent that the bat moves; and some just go by "feel." My proposal is that a "swing" occurs when any part of the bat enters into any area above the plate. Any robo-ump could detect that pretty easily.

In all ball-strike calls and checked-swing calls, I would have the electronic system be the correct call by default, and also have the system announce the call to the crowd. The field umpire would have the right to overrule the system.

A ball that bounces before entering the strike zone is a ball by rule, unless the batter swings at it, unless it is a foul ball and the batter already has 2 strikes.
 
If each ump had his zone would be ok if they were consistent, but the broadcast technology shows that not to be the case.
Yea that doesn't work. Having different strike zones isn't a fix. It's having different strike zones that is the reason they are looking at ai umps. But another poster mentioned how much of an offensive explosion there will be if pitchers don't get any calls of the black..and I agree. That's why any type of ai will need to include a top view of where the ball crosses the plate.
 
Top