According to Major League Baseball, quoted in "Minor League Baseball To Experiment With Robotic Umpires" (NPR).
"The game on the field is constantly evolving, and MLB must be thoughtful and intentional about progressing toward the very best version of baseball – a version that is true to its essence and has enough consistent action and athleticism on display to entertain fans of all ages," Theo Epstein, consultant to MLB, said.... "These rules experiments will provide valuable insight into various ways to create a playing environment that encourages the most entertaining version of the game"....
Do you want robot umpires?
The main loss is that the role of the catcher is changed. He can't be a trickster, "framing" the pitch to create the impression that the ball is more nearly or more squarely in the strike zone. Is that something that made watching the game more fun? It made it more human. If the whole game were played by robots, it would not even be worth watching. Or do you think it would, because there could be much more action? And you'd have no injuries at all... or is that part of what we like about action, the risk of real pain and damage?
Posts
67 comments:
Don't care about it much one way or the other, but they damned sure need to take calling pitches away from umpires. Way to subjective, and way to subject to biased umps. Seen too many obvious strikes called balls and too many balls called strikes.
By "improving the length of the game" they want to make it even longer?
I'm all for creating more balls in play but they can do that by structural things, like lowering the mound and moving the fences back. Well, maybe they could do that.
What people like about sports is the HUMAN element. To see the wonder of a person doing something that is almost super human. Making the impossible catch. The long and accurate throw. The speed of the runner to beat the ball that was thrown to the baseman.
The "agony" of defeat is also part of the HUMAN element. The missed catch..oh no!!! The runner tripped. The throw was wild.
Without the HUMAN element, there would be no thrill in watching the action, no sympathy or pride in the players. The ability to vicariously experience the game.
YES. Even the fallible umpires are part of the HUMAN element. When your team loses, the umpires are a great release valve of pent up emotion. Boo Hisssss. The Umpire is blind. He sucks!!!!!
I don't even watch sports anymore or even really like sports. But...even I understand this and why robots playing sports would be a total losing proposition.
Why do I picture the robot ump as Bender from Futurama?
The first rule you should learn when playing or coaching baseball or softball. If you piss off the umpire you will not get a close call the rest of the game. Count on it.
Another thought about robot players. Football.
How is a girl going to be able to admire and fantasize on the magnificent buttocks and fine physiques of the running backs?? Robot butts are just not going be an adequate substitute.
TMI DBQ
Do you want robot umpires?
Hell no! It would mean and end to the time honored American tradition of hating on the Ump!
Also, wouldn't be as satisfying to watch the manager kick dirt on it when he doesn't like the call.
Down with our robot masters.
“There has been constant throughout American history: baseball.” Field of Dreams
This is a super terrible idea.
Baseball is played by humans and it is about tradition.
A tricky catcher is a good catcher.
Pitch-framing always struck me as something that rarely, if ever, actually works.
Improving MLB means shortening the game which means reducing wasted time between pitches.
How about we just watch video games. What do we need humans for anyway?
https://youtu.be/kpeODvGJE1Q
Did someone raise the minimum wage for human umpires?
Let's start with robot lawyers and law professors. But I suppose we already have them, after a fashion.
New things to yell at games:
What is your optical sensor, one megapixel?
Your CPU is so slow you're still calling the last pitch!
And the classic "your mother" turns into "your motherboard" taunts.
I hate this idea. The innovations already in place - the strike zone box on TV, for instance - point up to me how often the elite umps get it right, despite the elite catchers' theatrics and misdirection - and therefore create another major league position for me to admire and/or critique.
I confess I don't watch much minor league or college ball, so I can see how taking that human element out of high-level-but-not-elite games could result in better (that is, more fairly called) games - but I fear the slippery slope. And like other commenters, I believe the umps provide a pressure valve.
One of those perpetually unanswered questions is, are the refs part of the game? If yes, then their fallibility is part of the game too. A wild card. Part of what teams have to be ready to overcome to win.
More so then in other sports, misdirection is a big part of baseball. Fooling people about what you're doing or what you're going to do. Robot umpires may undermine that part of the game, making it less interesting to the real fans (part of what's wrong with sports today is the decision to cater to non-fans).
Let the umpires call delay of game on both pitchers and batters.
That would improve the game more than anything else.
I've been watching umpires closely for over 60 years.
I have no problem with this.
Yogi Berra had a story of a game when it was over 100 degrees that day. He decided that he was going to get tossed from the game so he could sit in the clubhouse. So he started complaining about the calls on the first couple of pitches he caught. No dice. About the fourth pitch he starts to turn towards the umpire after throwing back to the pitcher. The ump stops him by saying if he has to be out there today so does Yogi - he isn’t going to get tossed out, so shut up and play ball.
How do we get stories like that with robots?
this is because of the $15 minimum wage, right?
i mean, RIGHT?
Let me see robot baseball and I'll tell you what I think of it. I can't even imagine it, now.
Robot umpires will need to be programmed and these programs will be biased through the beliefs of the developers. The bias will be systemic and the results will undoubtedly be unfair to many of those that the robots were intended to help. We’d need to see the source code to be able to determine if the calls were accurate or not. Probably using floating point numbers for balls and strikes and a switch to favor a specific team.
They should have an electronic device to help the umpire. The main problem in slowing the game down is NOT the umpires. Its the endless delays by the pitchers and batters. Just change it to 3 ball and 2 strikes, if they're going to spend 1 minute on every pitch.
john said...
By "improving the length of the game" they want to make it even longer?
I'm all for creating more balls in play but they can do that by structural things, like lowering the mound and moving the fences back. Well, maybe they could do that.
simple solution to make games last the short times they Used to last
Make a rule that IF you stop play to remove a player; That player HAS TO go on the disabled list
You want to change pitchers? FINE! do it between innings
You want to Stop Play? you're putting someone on the disabled list
Not Only, would it speed things up; it would make it MORE interesting
"How much stuff, does this pitcher have left? Can he make it through another inning, or should they take him out now?"
currently, they'll go through 2 or THREE! pitching changes in an inning
That's A LOT of time
Anything to lower the emotion of the game. It's just too damn exiting these days!
I tried to watch a little baseball the other day. MLB Network. Between no fan noise and announcers sounding like they were at the first tee at the Masters, it was unbearable. I won't be watching baseball again this year.
And you'd have no injuries at all... or is that part of what we like about action, the risk of real pain and damage?
That's really what's missing from all these celebrity interviews.
They’re testing another experimental rule that lets a batter steal first on a wild pitch or passed ball, so preventing that will give the catcher something new to do.
I have no problem with this, but the robots should have to declare their preferred pronouns before each game.
Is someone under the impression that people will return to the stadiums to watch baseball?
Unlikely, except perhaps in Texas.
JPS said...
Did someone raise the minimum wage for human umpires?
3/14/21, 9:20 AM
gilbar said...
this is because of the $15 minimum wage, right?
i mean, RIGHT?
3/14/21, 9:46 AM
Good thing I read the comments first because THESE were MY first thoughts too!!!
I will never understand the romanticization of umpires making wrong calls as "part of the game".
Dust Bunny Queen @ 9:14: "...robot butts..." You mean "robutts," right?
I'll go to my room.
“...designed to increase action on the basepaths, create more balls in play, improve the pace and length of games, and reduce player injuries."
I guess I could see a possible reduction in game length. But How does the auto-umpire increase action on the base paths?
How does it create more balls in play? Is it going to simply expend the zone so there’s more strikes called and force batters to swing more?
How does it reduce injuries? Seriously? Who gets injured because the ump is human vs robot?
Blogger Jim Gust said...
Is someone under the impression that people will return to the stadiums to watch baseball?
Yes [[raises hand]].
Are you under the impression no one outside of Texas will?
AlbertAnonymous said...
Sounds like a clear cut case for the need to have robot batters.
It'd take a pretty sophisticated robot referee to stay out of the way in a soccer game.
I agree with the first commenter, Tim. It's not fair to either pitchers or hitters to have the strike zone depend on who the umpire is, and even then the ump isn't consistent from pitch to pitch.
Fans and players get made at umpires when they think they're doing a bad job. It's not enjoyable to see your team lose due to incompetent umpiring, and getting angry as a result hardly makes up for it.
Tim Maguire at 9:26 asks the right questions.
My feelings argue the Umps are as much the human element as the players. Getting it wrong sometimes, is a feature not a bug. Why do fallible coaches and fallible players expect perfection from other humans? Almost all athletic endeavors are as much the player(s) adjusting to the human element of all, on the field of play, as skill and conditioning.
Baseball has lots of traditions. Lots of misdirection. Bill Veeck planted Ivy in Wrigley field, providing a place to hide a baseball if one was needed.
1. Umpiring is done in a personal way, not a machine way. Get to know an ump's style and that bit of knowledge might be worthwhile.
2. Robots, tho, would be cheaper to hack.
What’s the theory behind pitch framing? That umpires are the only people unaware of it, and therefore easily fooled? It’s transparently just another dumb thing for announcers to talk about, as they cycle relentlessly through their limited stock of dumb things. Batters behind in the count strike out more, he hits 347 on every third Tuesday against teams with blue in their logo, the catcher did a great job framing that pitch, batters behind in the count strike out more ...
Yes, I want robot umpires, but that isn't what you are going to get. You will get umpires that can be overruled by the robot.
The direct comparison is what has happened in tennis. High speed cameras now allow every single ball bounce to be almost instantaneously ruled in or out- no need for line judges or umpires in the big chair, and yet there they still are.
"Lurker21 said...
Why do I picture the robot ump as Bender from Futurama?"
It isn't just you!
WK,
LOL! Well done!
No. Not ever. To make errors is human, to forgive is devine to correct or prevent them is robotic. Natural selection depends on mistakes and happy accidents. Slippery slope to the apocalypse.
That said, I suppose it wouldn't be so bad to let the American League do it. As long as the National League stays pure, we will be okay.
If they work out for baseball, could we try robot Supreme Court Justices that actually know how to call balls and strikes?
Ceding control to computer geeks is a terrible idea. People who never played the game. They are always trying to digitize the human experience. Then the cloud goes down and everything turns to shit. Once you let these arrogant pricks in the tent, they own you.
Keep the home plate ump and get rid of the rest.
When robots attain consciousness will they try to have all those crude, stereotypic depictions of robots in 1950s science fiction banned?
Will they be coming for you, Robbie the Robot?
MLB saw the NFL introducing women refs at the Super Bowl and decided they rather go with robots.
One of the greatest plays in any sport is a dramatic play at the plate.
Late in the game needing a run to tie, the home team player hooks a shot down the line and his teammate on first tears around the base path heading for home.
The outfielder corrals the ball in the corner, fires to the cutoff man who turns and fires a bullet to home.
The crowd is on their feet and the stadium is a cacophony of noise.
The ball and the runner arrive at seemingly the same time, and in a cloud of dust the catcher reaches to apply the tag.
And then, and then...nothing.
A big sign flashes on the scoreboard: 'This play is being adjudicated by the robot umpire. Please wait for the result.'
"Robot butts are just not going be an adequate substitute."
So, you're saying that there's no bumper sticker on your truck reading, 'Robot butts drive me nuts'?
“ Robots, tho, would be cheaper to hack.”
Will Smartmatic supply the robots?
Seriously, I enjoyed the auto line calls at the Australian Open. No complaints, very accurate, and no interruptions with challenges, and then players bitching about whether the point should be replayed. I could get used to that in baseball.
MLB must be thoughtful and intentional about progressing toward the very best version of baseball
Every fucking thing. Is there anything that progressives don't infest and contaminate?
Robot Jessup: Son, we live in a world that has pitches, and those pitches have to be called by robots with sensors. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Television Viewer? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Joe West and you curse MLB. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know; that Joe West’s replacement, while tragic, probably saved minutes. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, *saves minutes*. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me behind the plate. You need me behind the plate. We use words like angular velocity, rate of spin, spherical momentum. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent determining something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a manager who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very game that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a bat and come to the plate. Either way, I don't give a *damn* what you think you are entitled to!
Manager Kaffee: Did you call the third strike?
Robot Jessup: I did the job I...
Manager Kaffee: [interrupts him] *Did you call the third strike?*
Robot Jessup: *You're God damn right I did!*
Why do I picture the robot ump as Bender from Futurama?
Bender would be greatly offended at the suggestion that robots be limited to umping, rather than playing or managing. If they are about progress, what can be envisioned is more like blernsball from Futurama.
https://youtu.be/9GGCUTkao5k
https://youtu.be/c69Qqg-nYAk?t=409
God bless, Kevin. Xlnt.
From a more detailed article on espn.com:
"Instead of using a three-dimensional zone that covers the entire plate, it will call balls and strikes based on a two-dimensional plane at the front of the plate."
A pitch that curves and moves over the plate from the side is currently called a strike. Under the robo system, such a pitch will be called a ball. Only pitches that are over the plate when they arrive at the plate will be called strikes. There are also significant issues about the robo will decide where the top and bottom of the strike zone should be.
Best bet is that this system will further homogenize the game: fewer pitchers with unusual breaking pitchers, fewer very tall or short players.
MLB can do whatever it wants and I won't give a damn.
They lost me when they puked BLM all over the pitchers mounds on Opening Day. Forty five years a fan. Done.
Apologies for getting this at second hand, but baseball writer Jason Stark is behind a pay wall (theathletic.com) for me:
"Hidden wrinkle: One of the issues with the previous version of the ABS was sweeping breaking balls that were called strikes but didn’t look like strikes to anyone but the robots — because they barely nicked a corner of the strike zone as they crossed the back of the plate. Hitters rightly complained that those pitches were never hittable, even though they were technically rulebook strikes. To address that glitch, this version of the electronic zone will no longer be three-dimensional, theoretically eliminating those optical-illusion strikes."
A perfect strike will not be a strike.
I prefer my sporting contests among and officiated by humans. The age old "human error" is a feature, not a bug.
The only baseball games I attend are Sunday afternoon games. Baseball is meant to be played on grass, in daylight, in which circumstances a leisurely game is part of the attraction. Even when the Royals were bad, the game itself was good.
Nobody became concerned about pace-of-game until they started playing primarily at night and begin at 8 PM. Then they wonder why there are so few kids at ballgames anymore.
Some people have no idea just how good MLB umpires are outside of Angel Hernandez. As far as balls and strikes are concerned, the training and review has gotten everybody on the same page and outside of maybe getting the hell out of there on a travel day, the judgement of those guys is incredible, as good as or better than a robot could be. There are blind spots robots cannot adjust to from my understanding and I’m guessing I’m the only 35 year umpire here. Hell on a typical night, if I’ve got two pitchers that know what they’re doing and a competent catcher I’ll maybe miss 2 or 3 pitches in a game.
This is about cost cutting by MLB. They have gutted the minor leagues and this is another sliver they can reduce. Currently there is a guy standing there barking out the result, but it won’t end there.
With bad pitchers and catchers, I’m not missing anything, I (And they, and their coaches) just wanna get the hell out of there.
I’m not about framing. I tell the catcher to stick it. I’ll take it from there. Me me me me!
Why not robot players?
Post a Comment