Automated Strike Zone AFL

[jerichoholicninja]

A writer at The Athletic thinks that MLB should expand to a 5 man umpiring crew, where the 5th umpire will be in a booth where he would set the top and bottom of the strike zone for each hitter. That's the best idea I've heard so far. Those 5th umpires will not be "specialists." They would be part of a normal crew of umpires, and so every umpire would get this job every 5th day.

 

I like the aspect that we would all be aware of who is setting the zone and the transparency and accountability that comes with it.

 

The umpires should have nothing to do with it. It should be clearly set in the rules what the top and bottom is for each batter with no variation. Umpires don't get to determine the width of the plate as whatever they want, why should the top and bottom of the strikezone be any different.

[MrTPlush]

Either you find the technology to track each hitter independently or it is a waste of time. In a perfect world each batter has a consistent stance and you could use averages of data in MiLB or spring training to give them a strike zone. Problem is players aren't consistent and change their stances all the time.

 

Just another sign it is dumb and a waste of time. If a good idea is just adding another umpire and not fixing the problem what is even the point? All you will have in a new way for the calls to be questionable.

[wntrtxn21]

Hate it. I've watched the NFL die a slow, agonizing death via replay. This is a game, they aren't nuclear missiles. We do not need a 5th guy or a computer telling us the ball was in fact on a line. It's OK for them to get it wrong. Stop killing the game.

 

I realize nobody can live with the mistakes, but I can.

 

No it's NOT ok for them to get it wrong. How many wrong calls are you ok with? It's all about getting more consistancy in the ball/strike calls. It shouldn't vary from night to night like it does now. You're still going to get some questionable calls, but if the new system can cut those calls by 60-70-80%, it will be worth every nickle.

[pacopete4]

Hate it. I've watched the NFL die a slow, agonizing death via replay. This is a game, they aren't nuclear missiles. We do not need a 5th guy or a computer telling us the ball was in fact on a line. It's OK for them to get it wrong. Stop killing the game.

 

I realize nobody can live with the mistakes, but I can.

 

Ditto. For the most part, the quality of an NFL game flat out sucks. I hate this road we are going down. Make the game pace quicker, fine. Replays and robots, no thanks.

[Pugger]

Right, the NFL also waits for an egregious call to happen and then over corrects to try to fix that egregious call so it doesn't happen again but usually just ends up with a convoluted rule nobody, including the refs really understand.

 

And they still can't get it right. After the missed pass interference call in the playoffs in New Orleans the league in their infinite wisdom decided to allow HCs to challenge these types of calls. The joke is only a tiny fraction of the calls are changed after challenged even if Stevie Wonder can see it was PI. In 40 pass interference-related plays that have been challenged in 79 games played this season just seven have been overturned. That’s a total of 17.5 percent.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Hate it. I've watched the NFL die a slow, agonizing death via replay. This is a game, they aren't nuclear missiles. We do not need a 5th guy or a computer telling us the ball was in fact on a line. It's OK for them to get it wrong. Stop killing the game.

 

I realize nobody can live with the mistakes, but I can.

 

No it's NOT ok for them to get it wrong. How many wrong calls are you ok with? It's all about getting more consistancy in the ball/strike calls. It shouldn't vary from night to night like it does now. You're still going to get some questionable calls, but if the new system can cut those calls by 60-70-80%, it will be worth every nickle.

 

It won't do that. It will just give way to new debates the very moment the system fails. We have become so obsessed with this that we are destroying the sports without a second thought in this never ending crusade to be laser precise. And we're not even doing that.

[SomewhereInTime]

Kind of what I figured. The problem with computerized strikezones is they have trouble with the up and down. Every hitter is a different size and has a different strikezone. It's perfect for inside outside though. A pitch is either over the plate or it isn't.

 

Again, in the minor lg. using the automated zone this past year, there was not that many problems. Umpires said the strike notification was instant and there was virtually no difference in the timing of their ball-strike calls. Height of the zone wasn't a significant problem. People act as if there already wasn't a huge discrepancy in the height of the strike zone. Watch the game and see how much the zone varies by umpire. Using the automated zone makes correcting height and width fairly simple. The ultimate goal is consistancy, something that was unobtainable using umpires.

 

Sounds good, hopefully within a few years the bugs are ironed out and we have a computerized strikezone at all levels.

[owbc]

I think the ballpark experience for the fans is going to be enhanced by the Autozone. The big scoreboards in MLB parks will likely turn into a gameday-like interface with live pitch f/x data. The ump will signal the ball/strike call and then fans will look to the scoreboard for the "replay". Even casual baseball fans will gain a quick appreciation for pitch types and locations.

 

Nuances that are sometimes hard to appreciate in person (like fouling off a tough pitch) will become obvious to everyone.