Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Umpires? We don't need no stinkin'...

The Wall Street Journal has an article up about baseball and umpires, triggered by the blown call on Joe Mauer's 11th-inning "foul" hit against the Yankees. It poses a question I wondered about myself this week: why isn't technology used more in the MLB? For example, here's an excerpt:

Mike Port, vice president of umpiring for MLB, says that when it comes to calling balls and strikes, the umpires are about 95% accurate. But here's the interesting part: The Pitch-f/x system's ball and strike calls are very near 100% accurate.

Bud Selig says "the human element is vital to baseball." Why? What's so great about 5% error? I'm not saying umpires should be completely replaced with technology, but baseball, unlike, say, football, is made up of many calls that are simply "in" or "out," ones and zeros. A computer can handle that, and do it really well. A foul ball, a strike or ball, these are simple things that don't need to be missed. Leave the judgment calls to the umpires, but let computers handle the digital stuff.

5 comments:

Ump said...

What, no bonus points for naming the movie that the headline rips from?

On a side note, I was disappointed in "that" movie. I heard a lot of hype about it, everyone said it was great, so maybe I expected too much. Maybe it was too much slapstick. I don't know, but I wish I would have found it a lot funnier. Or, maybe I just didn't feel comfortable watching it in the same room as my wife.

Ump said...

It's always been explained to me this way:

Every rule requires a little bit of judgement, and every judgement requires a little bit of a rule.

MLB is definately afraid of something. The purists certainly won't want a computer calling balls/strikes, fair/foul. (What if Verlander throws too fast for the computer to judge it?) Safe/Out, fair/foul could certainly be judged by umpires, but challenged by managers like any other sport and review the play.

I've watch a little bit of tennis and the players can challenge a line judges call if the ball was in or out. Surprisingly, it took a matter of SECONDS to get the review and call correct. If that's the case, I don't know why every play isn't reviewed on it's own or why there needs to be a limit on the number of challenges. If we're trying to get a call correct, and it only takes a matter of 5 seconds, why not let a player challenge every call?

Eventually, if calls keep getting reversed via instant replay, then that persons job is in jeopardy. Either they can't do the job right or they can't handle the speed of the game to make the correct calls.

If that happens in baseball on balls/strikes (if they used umpires but allowed batters/pitchers to challenge a pitch), then eventually batters/pitchers will not respect Umpire Joe because he is prone to miss 5-10% of his calls when they know someone or SOMETHING could do better.

If there was a system in place, would the umpire do a better job or worse? Would they try harder because it could be reviewed? Or, will they "take a pitch off" and not worry about their call and just assume the batter/pitcher can challenge it if they want and it will be corrected?

Interesting to see where we'll be in 5 years. All that needs to happen is a huge call get blown against the Yankees, and then it will be a big fight.

Would Derek Jeter be Derek Jeter if 15 years ago we could review his "homerun" that Jeffery Maher reached into the playing field and pull into the stands when an Oriole RF was standing right there waiting to jump and rob his homerun?

Stack said...

I would have offered, but I usually use that quote without even thinking of The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. It's not unusual to hear it quoted in my family, though usually referring to the University of Wisconsin.

I haven't actually seen it myself, but I'd have to agree that many older movies tend to have awkwardly placed humor that makes you want to skip to the next scene.

Maybe I should put together a list of "old" movies that are entertaining, I've seen quite a few this year.

Ump said...

Oops. I was thinking of "Blazing Saddles." Maybe "Blazing Saddles" ripped it from the movie you were referring to.

Stack said...

Yeah, I suppose technically I am quoting Blazing Saddles as the full quote from The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is longer, but that's the source of both.

It's definitely better with a bunch of guys. One of my favorite college stories how three of us that had a class together watched all of Blazing Saddles just before the final, then we all aced it.