Slashdot Mirror
Major League Baseball Finally Begins Experimenting With Robot Umpires (espn.com)
"Baseball's potential future will be showcased in the independent Atlantic League this year, and it includes robot umpires..." reports ESPN, calling it part of "a wide variety of experiments that the Atlantic League will run this season as part of its new partnership with Major League Baseball."
While MLB has long tested potential rule changes in the minor leagues, its three-year partnership with the Atlantic League -- an eight-team league that features former major leaguers trying to return to affiliated ball -- offers the ability to try more radical rules. MLB has chafed at using technology to replace ball-and-strike-calling duties for umpires, fearful that it's not yet consistent enough to warrant implementation... [W]ith the TrackMan system installed at Atlantic League stadiums, MLB will have a trove of data to analyze and see the effect of doing so.
Other changes aim to speed up the game, including bans on visits to the pitcher's mound and shortening the amount of time between innings.
Other changes aim to speed up the game, including bans on visits to the pitcher's mound and shortening the amount of time between innings.
Strike 3! Please put down your bat. You have 30 seconds to comply.
And then one of them screamed "Umpire 3927 want to live!" during a Braves game, ran off the field, and killed two hot dog vendors.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The rule changes are interesting, I think adding the radar system for helping call balls and strikes will probably cause more problems than it will solve.
Many of the changes will result in a faster game, but they don't address what I see as the real time waster and energy drag - the throw from the pitching mound to hold a runner at first.
How about calling a ball on the batter each time that's done? It will mean that if the runner is a slug will stay close to the base but if the runner is fast, knowing that the pitcher will give up a ball throwing to first, will probably be more aggressive about getting ready to steal second. This will add tension to the game and eliminate the endless throwing balls to the first basemen, destroying the rhythm of the game.
Oh, if you're adding robots, don't forget the blackjack - and hookers!
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
Most of the sports which have implemented automatic or instant replay review have made it part of a challenge system. The umpire or referee makes calls as before, but if the player or coach feels the call was wrong they can challenge it. Only then does it it get reviewed. Each side has a certain number of challenges they're allowed per game. If their challenge overturns the umpire's call, they get the challenge back. If it confirms the umpire's call, they lose the challenge (have one fewer for the rest of the game).
The system used in tennis is probably the closest analogue to how it might work in baseball. It's quick, so doesn't delay the game much. It adds drama to the game as everyone (players, refs, fans) gets to watch the replay together (not like the terrible system in football where only one guy in a hidden room somewhere watches it, and radios his decision to the field). And the result has been accepted by players and refs as definitive, so it actually cuts down on the amount of time wasted arguing over calls.
It also provides objective evidence if there's a ref or ump who's clearly doing a bad job. Which baseball badly needs since there are some umpires who have a reputation for calling a small strike zone, some for calling a large strike zone.
”MLB has chafed at using technology to replace ball-and-strike-calling duties for umpires, fearful that it's not yet consistent enough to warrant implementation...”
Has anyone claiming this ever actually watched an MLB game?
Look, if they want to argue something else - e.g. how the human element is part of baseball - sure, I can understand that. But let’s not pretend that even the older Pitch f/x system wasn’t significantly more consistent at identifying balls and strikes than major league umpires like C.B. Bucknor. Heck, Jeff Sullivan used to run a semi-regular series of posts on FanGraphs where he would identify (with video) the five most egregious ball / strike calls of the week.
#DeleteChrome
When the human umpire makes an error, it's only sometimes attributed to favoritism... most often it is because he's an idiot, and/or a blind man.
When the umpire machine is in error, it'll be a short hop to conspiracy theory.
Of course, you can theoretically rig either system; electronic oversight will just up the skill set required.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Although the poor calls have been annoying ever since we got instant/video replay, I fear this is going to be a mess. For one, I don't think electronically determining the strike zone is going to be as easy as most think: Batters have all kinds of different sizes, stances and motions. (Not to mention the other moving human(s) hunkered down next to the plate.) And that's on a clear day. Don't forget foul tips, etc.
And, I'm torn; I'm not really a fan of adding "tech" to such a (150-year old) game, but I have to admit the (umpires') subjectivity of it all has soured me over the years.
Or maybe they could stop stretching every conceivable brief stop in the action into 1-2 minute commercial breaks...
#DeleteChrome
And that's on a clear day.
Baseball isn't played if there is inclement weather. You can't just recycle your "self-driving cars will never happen" talking points into your "robot umpires will never happen" post.
Enigma
They'll still play in a light rain, which is necessary (at least during the regular season) to make sure games get played at all. There ane many parts of the country where it's just not possible to schedule 81 home games without hitting weather a significant portion of the time, and baseball should not be played indoors (at least at the top level).
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Umpires could have been replaced with reviewing footage back in the 70s but they didn't because bad calls are part of the sport. Why do this now? Are they just trying to save money? An Umpire can't cost that much can they? And the last thing the blue collar folks who watch baseball are gonna want is to see robots on the field.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The older domed stadiums generally had artificial turf instead of grass. It's a harder surface and pretty rough on player's knees. The ball also bounces differently - it tends not to slow down as much on a bounce.
Tampa's domed stadium has a weird roof, and balls sometimes bounce off the ceiling lighting / support structures.
I think you can build a stadium that solves all the major complaints, but the cost estimates end up about triple the cost of an outdoor stadium, so teams usually just go for the outdoor stadium.
Baseball is unique in that regard. If a city can afford a dome for football they usually want one, aside from the charm of playing football in a blizzard.
There are often compelling reasons a baseball team wants an indoor field but they change over time. Only a few cities have had the topic come up again and again to the point where they take the idea more seriously. In an ideal world, I think most people would want all baseball games played outside. There will always be some team that needs a dome of course.
Baseball is a human game played by humans. If you replace the umpire, may as well replace the batters pitchers catchers runners and fielders managers coaches bat boys...
I'll grant that if the field can be rolled outside to soak up sunlight when not in active use, then rolling a natural grass surface indoors to play proper baseball may be viable. It works in Arizona, although for football. My purism is much more about the surface on which the game is played, as it has had over a century to optimize for those conditions. The roof just makes it hard to maintain a proper surface, and in one particularly egregious case (Tropicana Field) the roof supports actively interfere with the game.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
I'm looking forward to https://futurama.fandom.com/wi... personally. This is a step in the right direction. If we could only enforce steroid consumption, maybe modern day baseball will be worth the while to watch...
What is the first thing you notice when you walk into a ball park? Ads. Ads everywhere. What dominates a televised game? Ads. Anything that fucks with the revenue stream created by ads probably is not going to be embraced by the league owners. Every gap in play has a queue full of commercials. Reducing those gaps reduces that revenue stream. For broadcast games, automated officiating means the multiple replays of disputed calls will stop, and that means all those revenue producing ads queued up for that particular gap in play will evaporate.
With that said, I will make a prediction. Baseball doesn't really have a time-out system, like American football, but I would predict the "TV time-out" the NFL introduced to enhance their ad revenue stream will be introduced to baseball if automated officiating ever is adopted.
I think it's several factors driving the increase in game time, but I actually think holding runners on first is probably less of a concern. Stolen bases last year were down 15% compared to 40 years ago, and most teams have analytics that tell them that losing runners from stolen bases ends up costing runs when they aren't on base when the next home run happens.
Bigger problems are that batters are less likely to swing, driving up pitch counts, which results in more pitcher changes, walks and strike outs. Conversely, you have pitchers that have gotten so good that hitters averages are down although home runs are up.
There has been talk of lowering the mound which would hopefully help hitters get the ball in play more, but it remains to be seen.