When they go robo, they also need to widen the plate. These hitters are good, and that's why pitchers have to nibble and beg for the pitches on the edges.
Robot balls & strikes needs to happen
5,423 Views |
51 Replies |
Last: 6 yr ago by toucan82
Well said mate. Call it like you see it. Sometimes you hose, sometimes you get hosed. That's the allure of sports and officiating.hph6203 said:
Yes. Butt hurt fans over officiating is part of sports and I'd genuinely be happier if there was less of a trend towards replay reviews. Life is imperfect, sports should be too.
I'll never get over the refs screwing the Mavericks out of the 2006 NBA championship. But that created a story that haunts Mavs fans. And the fact that we worked over Miami in 2011 made payback even sweeter.
College football is a runaway train of horribly abusing instant reply. The games are 4 hours long. Give each team a couple of challenges, review scores and turnovers and let's get on with it.
Saying you want more bad calls because the current bad call avoidance system sucks is so bizarre.
Count me in the group that can't understand the infatuation with having missed calls being "part of the game". I really started paying attention more after one of the games where Berkman was in the booth and was making the point about how it's not just the single missed pitch that's the issue. Rather, it's the impact that missed pitch has on the rest of the AB. A batter's approach on a 2-1 count is going to be different than a 1-2 count. The AB changes and potentially results in a different outcome, thereby potentially changing the outcome of an inning.
The kinks will get worked out of the system in the minors. All of the issues people have listed above will be addressed before it goes live in MLB, assuming the umpire union doesn't completely quit over it.
I get annoyed sometimes at reviews taking longer than I think they should, but ultimately I'm willing to accept the delay if that's what it takes to get calls right. The goal should be to get as many calls right as possible so the players actually decide the outcomes of the games, and those outcomes are not influenced by incorrect calls may by fallible humans.
The kinks will get worked out of the system in the minors. All of the issues people have listed above will be addressed before it goes live in MLB, assuming the umpire union doesn't completely quit over it.
I get annoyed sometimes at reviews taking longer than I think they should, but ultimately I'm willing to accept the delay if that's what it takes to get calls right. The goal should be to get as many calls right as possible so the players actually decide the outcomes of the games, and those outcomes are not influenced by incorrect calls may by fallible humans.
It's past time to do this. It would be invisible to the fans, as you'd still have ump behind the plate with an alert in his ear. I think the curveball concern is overblown. But spend 2 years using it in the minors, then implement
coconutED said:
They would work great for determining whether or not a pitch crossed over the plate. Not so much for the vertical limits of the zone, because it's different for every player, and players also sometimes change their stances as well. Potential solutions:
1) Make the strike zone height a set distance from the ground, regardless of player size
2) Manually set the zone height every at bat (IIRC, this is what the old QuesTec system did)
3) Measure every player and put all of their zones in a database
4) Install sensors in player uniforms
5) Let the computer determined if the ball crossed the plate, continue to use the Home Plate umpire to evaluate pitch height
Each of these has their own set of problems and issues.
A batter's stance has no effect on the zone.
TexasRebel said:
A better stance has no effect on the zone.
OFFICIAL BASEBALL RULESQuote:
The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the kneecap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.
No way should Jose Altuve and Aaron Judge should have the same sized zone.Quote:
Make the strike zone height a set distance from the ground, regardless of player size
coconutED said:TexasRebel said:
A better stance has no effect on the zone.OFFICIAL BASEBALL RULESQuote:
The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the kneecap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.
If that were true the proper stance would put your shoulders below the knees.
91AggieLawyer said:
Think about it: if you're convinced a call was missed and someone points out that, either by rule or by interpretation, the officials or umpires actually got it right, what is your FIRST reaction?
"Oh, OK, I learned something then."
OR
"Bull****"
Be honest, please.
Well, we now know how TexasRebel would answer this question.
Tell me ed.
If the strike zone were really determined that way, why wouldn't you employ 9 contortionists that bat with their shoulders at their knees and a battery of pitchers?
You'd never not get a walk. Heck. You wouldn't even need to buy bats.
If the strike zone were really determined that way, why wouldn't you employ 9 contortionists that bat with their shoulders at their knees and a battery of pitchers?
You'd never not get a walk. Heck. You wouldn't even need to buy bats.
Dude...I'm just quoting the rule book; it's pretty clear what it says.TexasRebel said:
If the strike zone were really determined that way, why wouldn't you employ 9 contortionists that bat with their shoulders at their knees and a battery of pitchers?
My guess: because it would be the most boring game ever, nobody would watch, and it wouldn't make any money. If some team actually tried this, the rule would probably be rewritten in very short order.
The rule used to say "as the batter stands in the box."
-or maybe the NCAA rule does, I'm not where I can look it up ATM-
Not "as the batter prepares to swing". Which was a very wordy way to say "normal upright stance".
MLB doesn't give a crap if it's boring.
It's very boring to know that in a crucial situation a ball/strike call is going to **** up a good game.
-or maybe the NCAA rule does, I'm not where I can look it up ATM-
Not "as the batter prepares to swing". Which was a very wordy way to say "normal upright stance".
MLB doesn't give a crap if it's boring.
It's very boring to know that in a crucial situation a ball/strike call is going to **** up a good game.
The NCAA rule is virtually the same:
There's also this, from the MLB rules:
Quote:
Strike Zone
SECTION 75. The area over home plate from the bottom of the kneecaps to the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants. The strike zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.
There's also this, from the MLB rules:
So, there's the answer to your contortionist batters -- the umpires on the field will decide what to do about it.Quote:
8.01 Umpire Qualifications and Authority
...
(c) Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules.
But it's already addressed in the rules.
Not up for interpretation.
Not up for interpretation.
In that case, if the upper limit is below the lower limit, then the strike zone would extend to an infinite length vertically, and exclude only the space above the torso and below the knees. In essence, there would no longer be a "strike" zone, but an "anti-strike" zone (or maybe a "ball" zone).TexasRebel said:
But it's already addressed in the rules.
Not up for interpretation.
Either that, or it would create a paradox and end the universe as we know it. I'd say the chances are 50/50.
Think more along the lines of absolute values.
Also, I don't think an anti-strike would be a ball. It would be more like, 3 anti-strikes and you get an extra out while the previous batter is up again.
Seriously, though.
The most interesting case is where the upper limit equals the lower limit and the strike zone is a 2D area instead of a volume.
Also, I don't think an anti-strike would be a ball. It would be more like, 3 anti-strikes and you get an extra out while the previous batter is up again.
Seriously, though.
The most interesting case is where the upper limit equals the lower limit and the strike zone is a 2D area instead of a volume.
Featured Stories
See All
3:03
1d ago
11k
Win streak reaches four as A&M never trails at Georgia, 92-77
by Olin Buchanan
5 Thoughts: Texas A&M 92, Georgia 77
by Luke Evangelist
35:23
2d ago
5.6k
Three Things: Where Texas A&M's 2026 class ranks nationally
by Jason Howell
agmd85
Bucky Ball article from AL.com - Why does college basketball hate Bucky
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
48