For anyone who missed it last week, here's an article about Mike Schmidt's endorsement of using an automated system to call balls and strikes.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/s...ls-or-strikes-041114
I never thought I'd find myself in favor of this, but I've come around to the idea. I also believe it will come to pass sooner than later. The first problem I have with MLB umps calling pitches is that the strike zone becomes too much about each ump. Each ump has his zone... which is sort of ok, because pitchers and catchers (and hitters) learn the subtle differences and adjust to them. The problem is a) time and b) human nature. Over time, each ump continues to hone his zone... until sometimes differences aren't so subtle. This can end up with around the bend strike zones like Eric Gregg's or a Joe West approach to umping... guys defensively and foolishly validating their own ego insanity with ever more ego insanity. Most umps aren't off the charts like this, but the same dynamic is at work to one degree or another.
But here's my bigger problem with MLB umps calling balls and strikes... too much spotlight. This is where human nature really goes to work. The ump becomes part of each pitch. There's power in that, and power corrupts. I want dispassionate umpires making dispassionate calls, but human nature works against that ideal. Here's the scenario where this comes into play most accutely. Tight game, late innings, team a couple of runs down with a couple of guys on base. What I want to see is pitcher vs hitter. I want to see the best player in that moment come out on top... be it hitter or pitcher. What I don't want to see is a lot of close pitches taken for balls... I don't want to see a walk, unless the pitcher just refuses or fails to come into the zone. What I see way too often are "hitters" taking a Jeter-like approach of watching borderline pitches... and umps picking and choosing. I don't want the umpire deciding an AB. And that includes every pitch in the AB, not just the obvious last one. I also don't want the premise of the at bat to be partly looking for the walk... rather than attacking.
As most know, the game didn't start out like that. Originally, their were no ball calls. Pitchers were expected to simply deliver the ball into the zone... let the hitter put it in play. Defending hit balls was the focus of the game. That's much the same way the game is played anytime a bunch of kids get together for a pick up game with no adults around (does this still occur anywhere?)... No one wants to walk! Flash forward 130+ years and of course the game is very different. I'm not suggesting a return to 1890s baseball... only that the pendulum has become stuck in the opposite direction. Crash Davis was wrong; strike outs aren't boring and fascist... Walks are. The base on balls is probably the most boring outcome in all of sports, other than the hockey tie or any soccer game.
So as today's pitcher is painting the corners and working up and down probably more than ever, and "hitters" are getting paid for OBP, and fans are yawning a lot more often, and considering the technology is more than adequate to the task... why not automate the strike zone and get rid of the guesswork? Give the pitcher every fraction of that 17x8.5x12 inches and if any fraction of a pitched ball breaks that area, ring it up. And, importantly, while we're at it... Let's set that Auto-Strike-Caller-9000 to do something that today's ump can't bring himself to do... call reasonable pitches above the belt.
Fewer "balls", less walks, more offensive aggressiveness, more action, faster games... more attendance, higher viewership and greater popularity for the sport. No more guesswork, ump personality driven zones, player status driven zones, or flatly missed calls. The point isn't that MLB umps do a terrible job calling balls and strikes; I think they do a good job overall. But take the human element out and watch action increase and game lengths decrease.