Taking the Human Element Out of Calling Balls and Strikes

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 4:15 PM CDT Comment 39 comments

Ever since the 2002 season, a company called Questec has supplied MLB with a product, the Umpire Information System (UIS), that gives umpires feedback on the accuracy of their calls of balls and strikes after each game.

The system consists of four cameras, two in the outfield stands above the first and third base lines to track each pitch, and two at field level to establish the strike zone for each batter. The system determines if the ball intersects any part of the three-dimensional strike zone and records the data on a CD, which is made available to the home-plate umpire after the game.

At first, umpires were adamantly opposed to the idea and a grievance was filed, which subsequently went nowhere. The only concession the ump's union extracted from MLB was the stipulation that MLB would use other methods of evaluating umps in addition to UIS.

Reasons for the ump's resistance to UIS?

The system had problems with accuracy.
It was not installed in all MLB parks.
Players on deck or in coaches boxes sometimes blocked the cameras needed to establish the strike zone on each batter.
Umps had the uncomfortable feeling of being second-guessed.

More recently, many umps have come to appreciate the feedback UIS provides. In Feb. 2007, Charlie Reliford called it a "...tool to make ourselves better."

My question is this: If the accuracy problems can be virtually eliminated, why not use UIS to actually call balls and strikes?

There would still be an umpire behind the plate. He would simply relay the call of the system to the viewers and fans at the park.

There would also have to be safe-guards built into the system to ensure it is not malfunctioning. If it was, the umpire could shut it off and call balls and strikes himself.

Also, all major league parks would obviously have to have the system installed -- as it is only installed currently in about 11 ballparks.

Additional References:
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-outside-corner/
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E5DD1F31F93AA15756C0A9659C8B63

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 39 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Answer to your question

you can't rely on computers, if it were to malfunction and there were no umpires, then what? Plus, think of how many jobs would be cut.

Now that he is back, play Matt Murton!!

by Chanman25 on Jul 30, 2007 4:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

As I said in the post,

there would be no change in the number of umpires. The system would be used by the home-plate umpire.

That umpire could determine whether or not the system was operating correctly, and shut it off if necessary.

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

that is the worst

idea I have ever heard. Why don't we just play the game on paper? Having an umpire is an important part of the game

GO CUBS GO!!!!!!

by roach on Jul 30, 2007 4:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

no way

Star pitchers deserve a bigger strike zone. Star hitters deserve a smaller one. If a guy hasn't walked a batter all day he deserves that close call. If guy has walked 5 in 5 innings, he doesn't.

human element.

by Chad on Jul 30, 2007 4:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

This is so wrong...

... I can't even begin to know where to start.

No one "deserves" anything. The zone should be called properly, period. No "star" deserves better than any other hitter.

If you think I'm arguing for the computer, you're wrong, too. This is a game played by, and officiated by, human beings. Everyone makes mistakes. It's part of the game. You want things called by computer? Play it on computers. Till then, I'll take the mistakes.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Jul 31, 2007 3:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

problems

John Walsh over at The Hardball Times did an analysis of umpires' strike zones using the new PitchF/X system that is being installed eventually in all MLB parks. The gist of his conclusions are essentially that umps are pretty good, right-handed batters have to defend a bigger strike zone than lefties, and that both umps and the machines can blow the call - apparently 5% or so of all the data that an ump called a ball, the machines tracked as right down the middle of the plate. Going back and reviewing the video shows the umps to be right, and the machines to be wrong. Unless the UIS system is so much better than the PitchF/X system, I'd be inclined to leave things alone since the umps actually do nearly just as good a job as the machines; better in some instances.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/strike-zone-fact-vs-fiction/

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-eye-of-the-umpire/

by false cognate on Jul 30, 2007 4:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

The system would have to be improved before this could happen. That would be the reason for my qualifier: IF the accuracy of the UIS system could be improved...

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

a disruptive technology could be made but.....

A chip could inserted into every ball, and invisible lasers set up to determine each strike zone...that might provide the best accuracy but would it be fun.....

part of the fun is the ump is a wild card...the human element...the call the dispute the wonder

it is a game....and humans are part of the game....

no I want an ump who is being watched make the calls and I want to yell when they call against me and laugh when I think I get a call

Milw-09-24-98--Brown in for defense--bases loaded--flyball--HE DROPPED THE BALL!!!NO NO NO, cubs lose 8-7

by Ivy Walls on Jul 30, 2007 4:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

That is what I expected

most people would say. I don't disagree with the sentiment, either.

But when I'm watching Bruce Froeming (sp?) botch his job behind the plate, my sentiment goes out the window.

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If they ever did this

I think people would be shocked how the computer called balls and strikes compared to what they have now.

Unpires have a tendancy to give a couple inches off of the outside corner, but squeeze the inside pitch and up high. I also think ERA's would drop drastically if this every happened, because the strike zone has clearly gotten smaller over the past 30 years.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Jul 30, 2007 4:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

It could happen

I could see this being possible years down the road.

Let's face it. Technology is greatly improving every day. And it is slowly being incorporated into sports. Most significantly with the NFL replay rule. We have all been there to witness a bad NFL call be overturned by the Replay and although the integrity of the game and history of "the way it should be" will always be in question. But you have to argue that it is worth seriously thinking about.

I totally disagree with the star pitchers and star hitters special treatment. If a pitcher or hitter is a star and great at what he does, then he should have to play with the same damn strikezone as the worse in the league.

It would be stupid if some pitcher is about to break Kerry Wood's strikeout record and the last hitter is down 0-2 and the pitch is 3 balls outside but the ump decides to give it to him cause he wants to be there for history.

A vast majority of the pitches managers give is for the strikezone. (see Bobby Cox) A FURTHER DEVELOPED AND MORE ACCURATE electronic system would get rid of that and managers can focus on teaching their young hitters to not chase that pitch way outside instead of teaching him bad habits.

You would still have the umpire behind the plate to make calls at the plate, just not all the pitches.

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

sarcasm

I think the poster a few posts back was being sarcastic. At least, I hope he was.

by false cognate on Jul 30, 2007 5:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hate this topic

Umpires are part of the game... Balls and Strikes should always be called by a human. The only thing i question is the play we had yesterday with the fan interference, fair and foul HR balls, and maybe out/safe at home...

PIE!!!

by LilLPLancer23 on Jul 30, 2007 5:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

You could also argue that.

In every other sport each rule is white or black. A touchdown is a touchdown and three pointer is a three pointer (oh dont they sometimes have to use cameras for help?)

But with the strikezone. There is just a general guideline, and even that changes over the years. Each and every umpire calls the game a bit different and that is not fair to hitters or pitchers. If every umpire can not maintain the same strikezone then I think its worth thinking about going electronic. Its not fair to a hitter to know where the outside corner is one day, and then the next day its 3" farther.

This would be an advantage to every player and treat everyone equal so I dont see why the players would have a problem with that. Pitchers or Hitters

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

And Holding is...

not subjective? Every sport has judgment calls of some kind or another. Did Ben Wallace block the shot or hack the player. Was that a hold or a good block? Was that roughing or a good check. Did Tiger ground his club in the sand hazard?

by frustratedfan on Jul 30, 2007 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

People think that

This is the way the game is supposed to be played because "human calls" is the way its always been done.

But I bet that if they had a system to do this way back when the first game was played I think they would have used that.

A good comparison would the the 3-point line. I dont see in any NBA games where there is no line painted on the court and the Refs just use their judgement if the shooter was beyond that imaginary line for a 3-pointer.
If baseball could have lines painted in mid air somehow for the strikezone they would do it.

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I like that analogy

to the "phantom" 3-point line.

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

How about

no foul lines and fences. The umps would determine if the ball hit was fair or foul or hit far enough to make it a HR.

But that isn't the way the game developed and I'd hate to see it changed to an engineer's concept of fairness. I could just imagine some hacking into the computer system to fix the World Series.

Josh Kroeger. Remember the name. Stay tuned for the fame.

by tharr on Jul 30, 2007 5:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another valid concern - security

Look at the controversy over computer balloting in political elections.

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope he was too.

But unfortunately a lot of fans agree with that idea.

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

adaptation

plus having a human call strikes may lead to having a larger/smaller strike zone from day to day but it rewords players who can take that into account.
For example; Maddux (in his prime)seemed to be able to tell after a couple innings where the strike zone is and would adjust his pitches accordingly.
not having that variable does not reward a players ability to adapt. and afterall isn't adaptaion what seperates us from the animals

When in doubt punch Barret in the face

by jds2 on Jul 30, 2007 5:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

There's one I hadn't thought of -

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 5:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

There will be some judgement calls to be made.

But strikezone is a diffrerent story. You know there will be something close to like 300 pitches a game. And there is a system out there that is in development that claims it will be able to do a better job to make those 300 some odd calls a game.

Its not like it will take any more time out of the game. No 10 minute long study sessions in the replay booth.

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

So,

If you were a three point shooter, and you could make the shot anywhere on the court, but one time you shot it from point x and it was good. and then the next time you shot it from point x and it was no good. Is that your fault?

My point is, players in other sports aren't required to adapt during the game to figure out what is a good play or a bad play. The soccer goal never changes size, the basketball rim or three point line never move, but yet we require our pitchers and hitters to do that. Why?

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

But

there is a tremendous degree of adjustment to fouls in basketball and football. How about scoring systems in diving and gymnastics? In soccer did the player deserve a card?

Do you really want to take away the joy of arguing about calls? It's baseball, not Hollywood.

Josh Kroeger. Remember the name. Stay tuned for the fame.

by tharr on Jul 30, 2007 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

From a technical standpoint

how would you determine the upper and lower limits of the strike zone? Chris Young is about 6'10" and there are 5'4" players. And what if a player crouches at the plate when he's hitting? When do you measure him? Does everyone have to stand up straight?

The human element is part of the beauty of the game. The Dome Stadiums and Astroturf were supposed to eliminate the imperfections of the game but those idiosyncrasies are one the reasons to love the game. Imagine Wrigley Field without the flags blowing.

Josh Kroeger. Remember the name. Stay tuned for the fame.

by tharr on Jul 30, 2007 5:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

From a purely technical point of view

the current system apparently takes the differences in batter size into account by the two cameras at ground level. (See the references) However, I can't argue against the idea that the human element is part of the game. I have a lot of respect for that opinion.

Still, there would be plenty human elements left.

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The two cameras

measure the batter when he first enters the box, I presume. So a smart batter walks into the box crouched over creating a smaller strike zone. The guys who can crouch the most have a distinct advantage. Is that fair?

Josh Kroeger. Remember the name. Stay tuned for the fame.

by tharr on Jul 30, 2007 5:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

that would not be fair. I'm pretty sure there are ways to get around that, though.

If nothing else, have the umpire make a judgement call like they do now -- I beleive it is up to the umpire to determine whether or not the player is crouching to influence the strike zone.

Something would also have to be worked out for when a player crouches lower than usual to bunt.

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I assume that

I would assume that the cameras would b able to see the hitter and be ale to pick out key parts of the body like the knee and shoulders and every to create the zone. I know the technology is there to do that but I am not sure what this system uses.

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Once Again,

With a home run fence and foul lines you can easily create a boundary that would be easy to judge.

You cannot do that with a strikezone because it is in the middle of the air and is difference based on the hitter at the plate.

Home run fence does not change pitch by pitch.

Although I do remember hearing about some field that adjusted their fence on a day to day basis lol

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Well,

I suppose that when a controversial call is made in the NFL and the ref goes over to the replay booth i can hack into system and do a quick video editing job and make it appear as though the ball crossed the endzone

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Why dont they do that now

Why dont you go get some midget to go up the the plate then. He'll walk every time right?

i dont think Hank Aaron got his homeruns but crouching at the plate as much as he could.

If you had some electronically super accruate system to make all those other calls you listed then i think it would be good idea to look into using them just as we are.

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm not very knowledgeable

about baseball history, but I have heard a story about a very short baseball player in the old days who was used to get a walk when the team really needed it.

Anybody know who that was?

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

P.S.

The midget idea has been tried before

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Gaedel

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Yes -- that's it. Thanks.

"Signature must be less than 160 characters" -- Who has a name with 160 characters?

by BlueSox on Jul 30, 2007 5:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It would be funny if..

It would be funny if some major league team (besides the cubs) would try something like this again.

Midget - for walks
Olympic Sprinter - for pinch running

any other ideas?

Unfortunatly, you would have to burn a roster spot for these guys, maybe a september call up for the playoffs?? lol

by BMac on Jul 30, 2007 5:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Audit System

I don't want an automated strike zone via computer/cameras but I would be in favor of the umpires' union using this system of cameras and the such to perform regular quality audits.

These audits could be used to provide feedback and training for improvement. They could then use the system to provide annual reviews and start disciplinary actions against umpires that do not make the grade.

MLB umpires need accountability. They certainly could stand for a little turnover on some of the bad apples too.

There's always next year.

by BJ Simpson on Jul 30, 2007 6:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs