It's time to automate the strike zone

[GNatsNoMore]

No it wouldn't. If you do it like tennis, it would take 15 seconds, tops. There's virtually zero interruption into the flow of the game in tennis.

If you're buzzing the umps on every pitch, then just make the complete jump. Don't tell them that "technology says it's a ball or strike but in the end it's up to you". That's a bad combo.

I agree, there really is no interruption to the flow in tennis.  Just like the tracker in tennis clearly shows whether the ball is in or out, the tracker in baseball shows if it's a ball or strike.  It's not like a safe/out call challenge where you have guys in New York or wherever looking at plays 5 times from 3 different angles.  Ball/strike calls can be much more straightforward thanks to pitch tracker technology.  So the delay, once the challenge is made, should usually be 10-15 seconds tops. 

[HattoriHanzo]

I wish they had auto strike zones when I played hs and college.  If you think the mlb umps are bad, they are so much worse at bottom levels of baseball. 

[stealyerbase]

They need to put a chip in the ball and when it crosses the strike zone, a beep goes off in the umpires ear and he signals strike. It will be a seamless experience for the fans. I'm sure the techies will come on here and question the technology but I have faith that the geeks will figure it out.

The purists will say it will give an advantage to the hitter or pitcher and I think that's a valid discussion to have.

Or else just put a chip in the ump. When he misses a call he gets a jolt. People would pay extra to see blue lit up with a few volts. 

[Baseball is Life]

I wish they had auto strike zones when I played hs and college.  If you think the mlb umps are bad, they are so much worse at bottom levels of baseball. 

I played through HS and coached travel baseball. Umpiring at that level can be, uh, inconsistent. Calling strikes is a very complex endeavor, even harder than hitting. I don't care what Werth says.

[Mathguy]

How about a small step forward first - allow teams to challenge a strike 3 or ball 4 call ?

I think you think it's simpler than it actually is.

[Baseball is Life]

How about a small step forward first - allow teams to challenge a strike 3 or ball 4 call ?

And use what technology? I'm for anything that improves the status quo.

I see that 4 people voted to keep the current system. But none have said why.

[Baseball is Life]

Or else just put a chip in the ump. When he misses a call he gets a jolt. People would pay extra to see blue lit up with a few volts. 

I would have liked to put the charge to that s.o.b. who umpired last night. He missed the call on Werth with two on as well as the one on Harper.

[Ray D]

Calling strikes is a very complex endeavor, even harder than hitting. I don't care what Werth says.

Is calling strikes harder than algorithms?

[Natsinpwc]

I would have liked to put the charge to that s.o.b. who umpired last night. He missed the call on Werth with two on as well as the one on Harper.

The one to Werth was a strike per pitch track.  Or your trained chimp.

[PC]

The one to Werth was a strike per pitch track.  Or your trained chimp.

Actually, it wasn't.

[Natsinpwc]

Actually, it wasn't.

(Image removed from quote.)

The one they use on MASN had it as a strike. Which I suppose points to the fact that they would have to settle on which technology they use.  Not the same as tennis where they can focus where a ball is hitting a hard surface.

[aspenbubba]

My thought is a holograph and special glasses that only the umpire can read the pitch like the Raytheon night vision glasses used by the military

[BeltwayBaseball]

How about a small step forward first - allow teams to challenge a strike 3 or ball 4 call ?

I think you're just inviting critics to put up straw men and throw the argument off its course. They say the biggest difference in a count is 2-1 as opposed to 1-2 - so guys are just going to nag about that when they should be talking about the idea of challenging balls and strikes in general.

Just make it for all strike/ball calls, but limited in number you can get incorrect...say 2 or 3 tops.

[Baseball is Life]

I am challenging those 7 people who voted for "no change" to make their case. Not one person has.

[PC]

My problem with not arguing balls and strikes presumes that there is some limit, some bound to which a ball will never be called a strike.  That call last night was so egregious that gets called into question.  If that was a strike call, what can't be called a strike?

This is what replay, is supposed to do, by MLB standards.  Stop the really bad, obviously bad, calls.  That's the whole irrefutable video evidence thing.  Have an umpire sitting somewhere with an agreed upon pitch track, reviewing every pitch and when a really bad strike (or ball) calls happens buzz the home plate umpire to change the call.  No challenges.  A ball on the bounds of the track called either way is fine but when a ball that far out gets called a strike, something is wrong and needs to change.

[BeltwayBaseball]

I am challenging those 7 people who voted for "no change" to make their case. Not one person has.

I'm one of 'em, I made my case earlier, if you don't like it then that's that.

[Baseball is Life]

I'm one of 'em, I made my case earlier, if you don't like it then that's that.

You said you would support the challenge system. Why would you vote no?

[Lintyfresh85]

BeltwayBaseball

[Baseball is Life]

BeltwayBaseball

That's all you have? How about making the case that it would favor the hitters and change the dynamics of the game. I think that would be a fair argument against it.

But to settle for the status quo because the old guard in baseball fears change is doing the game a disservice.

[HattoriHanzo]

For those that don't want technology interfering with the game you are against Bryce Harper.  Dude will not get calls his way until he changes and gets umps to respect him and like him more.  These asshats in blue are begging for these outside pitches to punch him out on.

[DPMOmaha]

For those that don't want technology interfering with the game you are against Bryce Harper.  Dude will not get calls his way until he changes and gets umps to respect him and like him more.  These asshats in blue are begging for these outside pitches to punch him out on.

He's had a ton of borderline calls go his way.

[comish4lif]

That's all you have? How about making the case that it would favor the hitters and change the dynamics of the game. I think that would be a fair argument against it.

But to settle for the status quo because the old guard in baseball fears change is doing the game a disservice.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that. If the automated umpire called the rule book, there are high strikes now that don't get called. There are parts of the strike zone that should belong to the pitcher, if the pitcher can hit those spots, he'll be in good shape.

[HattoriHanzo]

I'm not sure I'd agree with that. If the automated umpire called the rule book, there are high strikes now that don't get called. There are parts of the strike zone that should belong to the pitcher, if the pitcher can hit those spots, he'll be in good shape.

High strikes end up in the upper deck.  I'd welcome batters having to swing at higher strikes.

[Ray D]

I am challenging those 7 people who voted for "no change" to make their case. Not one person has.

It isn't a matter of making a case because I don't expect nor even hope to convince people.

 I hate the current challenge system. I've hated it since 1986 when it was instituted in football.   My shortstop makes a great play and throws the opposing runner out on a very close play (and maybe the runner could have been called safe -  but he wasn't); I want to enjoy the moment, not wonder if the call will stick - that ruins it for me.  And it disrupts the flow of the game. 

I can't begin to imagine  how much the game will change if they have any sort of ball/strike challenge system.  The cliche' that "nothing is more important than getting it right" is bullcrap to me.  Nothing is more important than enjoying the game, for me. If that means an occasional mistake, even against my team, I can live with that.

I completely support the idea of doing whatever we can to make the umpiring better.  I don't know what that is but there are people in baseball smart enough to figure that out.

[HalfSmokes]

I hate the idea of a challenge system- if you have something that can give an instant consistent ruling (I hate the idea that a rookie gets a different zone than an all star), just use it full time instead of setting up some unwieldy system just to make umpires feel better