Personally, I think that it is a sad state of affairs that the major topic of discussion during the playoffs has been the umpiring not the baseball action.
When you have announcers, internet, newspapers and fans talking as they are it certainly tells me something.
Even my wife last night asked me what was wrong with the umpires
I don't think we need replay---we need better umpires--umpires who need to be seen and not heard !
MLBPA Wants Meeting With Umoires
Representatives from the Major League Baseball Players' Association are trying to organize what would be a rare meeting between umpires, players and the commissioner's office to discuss growing concerns about the state of umpiring in Major League Baseball.
Representatives from the Major League Baseball Players' Association are trying to organize what would be a rare meeting between umpires, players and the commissioner's office to discuss growing concerns about the state of umpiring in Major League Baseball.
Is it acceptable for the Major League Umpires to tank four calls per game?
The math geeks in my network say the umpires claim to get 99% of the calls correct. They tell me that is four calls per game that are incorrect.
WoW.
The math geeks in my network say the umpires claim to get 99% of the calls correct. They tell me that is four calls per game that are incorrect.
WoW.
quote:Originally posted by Bear:
Is it acceptable for the Major League Umpires to tank four calls per game?
The math geeks in my network say the umpires claim to get 99% of the calls correct. They tell me that is four calls per game that are incorrect.
WoW.
Never heard that claim. Studies have indicated that the figure is closer to 95%.
quote:Originally posted by Bear:
Is it acceptable for the Major League Umpires to tank four calls per game?
The math geeks in my network say the umpires claim to get 99% of the calls correct. They tell me that is four calls per game that are incorrect.
WoW.
This would imply there are 400 calls per game. Even counting pitches, that's a lot of calls. And I don't think that missing a strike by an inch is the same as not calling Buster Posey out on his steal last night.
Which brings me to this...are there really that many MORE missed calls or is everything magnified today with 24-hour coverage on ESPN, MLB Network, internet sites, etc?
Kind of like 24-hour news stations. There probably isn't such a huge increase in certain events, it's just that there are cameras everywhere today.
quote:Originally posted by biggerpapi:
This would imply there are 400 calls per game. Even counting pitches, that's a lot of calls. And I don't think that missing a strike by an inch is the same as not calling Buster Posey out on his steal last night.
Which brings me to this...are there really that many MORE missed calls or is everything magnified today with 24-hour coverage on ESPN, MLB Network, internet sites, etc?
Kind of like 24-hour news stations. There probably isn't such a huge increase in certain events, it's just that there are cameras everywhere today.
You are on the right track. Allow me to place a post I made in umpire section here:
Today's cadre of ML umpires have been castigated as incompetent, lazy and unworthy of working the sport. I've given this a lot of thought lately as I've spent a lot time over the past six summers watching and apeaking with MiLB and MLB umpires. I also have spent considerable time watching film from the 50's. 60's, 70's and a few from as far back as the 40's.
From the evidence, I find no significant difference in performance, overall, between today's umpires and those of yesteryear. In fact, today's umpires, on average, are more athletic and mover more and quicker to get to their spots to make calls.
There's no Eric Gregg strike zones being called today, and in fact the outsde of the plate is being controlled better than a couple of games I got to review played in the 40's, including one with Bob Feller on the mound as the Indians took on the Yankees in 1946. Feller got the advantage of a huge strike zone.
Bangers at first...no difference. Number of arguments after close plays...no difference.
Here are differences: Endless Instant Replay. Replay was introduced in 1963 but didn't become a regualar part of baseball until 1965. Prior to that everyone from the umpire to the manager to the fan had one realtime look at the play. Differnces of opinion would pretty much just that, and they did not last long. With no evidence of an error, sportswriters and fans moved on.
Even when replay first became popular, a play was replayed one time, and then then everyone, even the announcers, goyt on with their lives. The technology at the time did not allow easy, nor quick replays over and over.
Another difference: More cameras shooting from more and different views. Some of the earliest games had one, then two , then three cameras...all positioned on the meezzanine level. Even as late as 1970 there were just five cameras, four on the mezzanine and one in centerfield.
Things started popping. In 1990 there were 12 cameras and nine taping machines. Today, there are more still and they are at set at different levels and angles providing views that, at times, no umpires has access to in real time.
And the advent of HD as added more clarity and a better view for everyone but the umpire.
Today, with cameras surrouding every play and every pitch, and the truly "instant" instant reply, fans can be shown anywhere between four and eight replays of a close call or pitch, and even more if the announcers decide to go back to it later in the game.
Stills can be taken from these digital videos and are often featured in papers and on websites.
So the umpire errors of today, unlike those of the 40's, 50, 60, 70, and to a large extent, the 80's, are confirmed as fact rather than opinion. Thus it appears that umpiring has declined.
It has not. The newer umpires are in better shape than ever. They are better trained than ever and they have better mechanics than their earlier brethern. They also have unforgiving, fully exposing and relentlessly playing evidence of their errors that their early brethern did not have.
And, notice that I said "errors." For some reason it is not deemed "good television" or interesting journalism to use instant replay on the 95%+ of the calls they get right.
quote:Originally posted by biggerpapi:
Which brings me to this...are there really that many MORE missed calls or is everything magnified today with 24-hour coverage on ESPN, MLB Network, internet sites, etc?.
Im not sure there are any more missed calls, but that certainly the technology available today can show it better than a human umpire can see it..
more cameras, HD and super slo motion replay leaves no doubt.....whereas years ago, it would not have....
Jimmy
Again the "president" of the fraternity speaks out in protection of the brethren
I dont really care about umpires 60 years ago---the game of baseball, as has football and basketball, haqs gotten fatser and the players bigger and quicker and I do not belive that the umpires/refs have kept up.
On top of that they all now have attitudes of major size.
As I posted earlier today it is a sad commentary that the umpires are the prime topic of conversation in this years playoffs
Again the "president" of the fraternity speaks out in protection of the brethren
I dont really care about umpires 60 years ago---the game of baseball, as has football and basketball, haqs gotten fatser and the players bigger and quicker and I do not belive that the umpires/refs have kept up.
On top of that they all now have attitudes of major size.
As I posted earlier today it is a sad commentary that the umpires are the prime topic of conversation in this years playoffs
There can be no doubt the advances in technology have caused this stir. Every play is replayed over and over from different angles constantly. Its almost like the TV crew is trying to see if they can present an outcome different than what we got. I depise the pitchtrax stuff. I can see where the pitch was from the view behind the pitcher. Too many gizmos and not enough knowledge about the actual game in the booth. Not enough real baseball discussion about the game during the game and too much focus on the guys that are not actually playing the game.
The umpires are the topic of discussion because the media has locked on to them. They drive the topic. They lock onto something they think is controversial and then they ram it and cram it down our throats. In the press conferences they ask question after question about calls and the umpires. How about talking about the game itself and the players?
The umpires today are better trained, in better shape and more professional than they have ever been. They are scrutinized to a level that we have never seen because of the technology on the field. And the medias need to create side stories to go along with the games.
The umpires are the topic of discussion because the media has locked on to them. They drive the topic. They lock onto something they think is controversial and then they ram it and cram it down our throats. In the press conferences they ask question after question about calls and the umpires. How about talking about the game itself and the players?
The umpires today are better trained, in better shape and more professional than they have ever been. They are scrutinized to a level that we have never seen because of the technology on the field. And the medias need to create side stories to go along with the games.
We've had umpires miss a call on the sinking line drive in the Yankees/Twins game. The apparent 3rd strike to Berkman (however, the first two strikes appeared to be outside?) followed by the double that subsequently ran Ron Gardenhire. And,the mis-call on the apparent check-swing from Young, which he followed with a three run dinger to CF, and later ran Joe Maddon (By Umpire Jim Wolf, who's brother is a pitcher in the MLB, I'm sure they have interesting family discussions!). Last night, it was evident in the "instant replay" that Posey should have been out at second on his SB attempt...Posey ended up scoring later in the inning, and that was the Only run of the game.
I'm not siding with umpires, I'm your typical "Couch Potatoe yelling at the Umps through the TV!
However, I agree with Jimmy and piaa that todays technology puts these guys under the microscope more than ever. No excuses, the game is quicker, the players are stronger, and Everyone needs to adapt...including the Blues!
I'm not siding with umpires, I'm your typical "Couch Potatoe yelling at the Umps through the TV!
However, I agree with Jimmy and piaa that todays technology puts these guys under the microscope more than ever. No excuses, the game is quicker, the players are stronger, and Everyone needs to adapt...including the Blues!
Here's what's great about baseball....
Berkman freezes on a borderline two strike pitch on the inside corner. Maybe the blue missed it or maybe he didn't.
Young checks his swing on what might have been a swing or might not have been a swing.
If the defense gets their way then they end up with an out. If the offense gets their way then they get ONLY another chance to do something.
Since both calls went to the offense the defense now has to get on the mound and make another pitch. That is what they would be doing even if the call had went their way. In both cases the offense blasted a shot off the wall and over it. That's not the umpires fault - that is the fault of the defense for not making better pitches.
Pavano followed up the inside fastball with a changeup and to be honest it was a pretty darn good one. But Berkman had blasted a changeup over the wall in a previous at bat. So why throw the changeup? Why not come back with another fastball or just something else?
Whoever was pitching to Young followed the check swing up with a c**k shot down the heart that got blasted 900 feet. Why did the pitcher throw that pitch? Why not ANYTHING else?
Both pitchers had to respond to a "bad" call as perceived by them and they failed to do so. That's part of baseball - mental toughness. Look at the Rays on the bench when the check swing was "missed" and how crazy they went. Are they really into trying to beat the Rangers or are they looking for reasons why they got beat?
The Twins are "snakebit" when it comes to the Yankees because they have lost their 8 or so postseason games. Everything is going against them and that's why they lose. But what about the fact that the Twins had a lead in almost every single of those 8 games? So in those 8 games fate / umps conspired to beat them or they don't have what it takes mentally?
The vast majority of players in MLB are pretty close to being equal in talent. You have the top players who are in a category of their own and a lower group who are barely hanging on and have a small role. The rest that make up a large chunk of the players are all pretty close in talent. So what separates that large group into winners and losers? I think it comes down to handling adversity is what makes a winner a winner when the other dugout is full of players with skills that are fairly equal to them.
Football if you're bigger / stronger / faster you're going to win the majority of time. Basketball is pretty much the same because some teams are just bigger. Occasionally you find a great shooting team that can offset the size but overall the taller teams are going to win. But when the bigger teams play each other in football / basketball what determines the winners and losers? Mental toughness to perform in adverse conditions.
Berkman freezes on a borderline two strike pitch on the inside corner. Maybe the blue missed it or maybe he didn't.
Young checks his swing on what might have been a swing or might not have been a swing.
If the defense gets their way then they end up with an out. If the offense gets their way then they get ONLY another chance to do something.
Since both calls went to the offense the defense now has to get on the mound and make another pitch. That is what they would be doing even if the call had went their way. In both cases the offense blasted a shot off the wall and over it. That's not the umpires fault - that is the fault of the defense for not making better pitches.
Pavano followed up the inside fastball with a changeup and to be honest it was a pretty darn good one. But Berkman had blasted a changeup over the wall in a previous at bat. So why throw the changeup? Why not come back with another fastball or just something else?
Whoever was pitching to Young followed the check swing up with a c**k shot down the heart that got blasted 900 feet. Why did the pitcher throw that pitch? Why not ANYTHING else?
Both pitchers had to respond to a "bad" call as perceived by them and they failed to do so. That's part of baseball - mental toughness. Look at the Rays on the bench when the check swing was "missed" and how crazy they went. Are they really into trying to beat the Rangers or are they looking for reasons why they got beat?
The Twins are "snakebit" when it comes to the Yankees because they have lost their 8 or so postseason games. Everything is going against them and that's why they lose. But what about the fact that the Twins had a lead in almost every single of those 8 games? So in those 8 games fate / umps conspired to beat them or they don't have what it takes mentally?
The vast majority of players in MLB are pretty close to being equal in talent. You have the top players who are in a category of their own and a lower group who are barely hanging on and have a small role. The rest that make up a large chunk of the players are all pretty close in talent. So what separates that large group into winners and losers? I think it comes down to handling adversity is what makes a winner a winner when the other dugout is full of players with skills that are fairly equal to them.
Football if you're bigger / stronger / faster you're going to win the majority of time. Basketball is pretty much the same because some teams are just bigger. Occasionally you find a great shooting team that can offset the size but overall the taller teams are going to win. But when the bigger teams play each other in football / basketball what determines the winners and losers? Mental toughness to perform in adverse conditions.
That was no borderline strike on Berkman. That was a no doubt about it strike. I could see a manager getting tossed over that missed strike.
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
Jimmy
Again the "president" of the fraternity speaks out in protection of the brethren
I dont really care about umpires 60 years ago---the game of baseball, as has football and basketball, haqs gotten fatser and the players bigger and quicker and I do not belive that the umpires/refs have kept up.
On top of that they all now have attitudes of major size.
As I posted earlier today it is a sad commentary that the umpires are the prime topic of conversation in this years playoffs
Attitude? What a short memory you have. There isn't an umpire working today who can match Shag Crawfor, Doug Harvey ("They call me God") or even Augie Donatelli for attitude. You remind me of colleagues who have selective memory of the past and continually whine about the present.
I agree, it is a sad commentary that the umpires are the topic of conversation. A lot less whining by announcers and a few spoiled players would be appreciated.
What you believe is insignifcant. The reality is there are fewer fat, out of shape umpires today than in 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's. The new crop are trim and athletic, more so than many players.
Umpire mechanics involve trade-offs and play the odds. There will never be mechanics devised that put umpires in the perfect spot to see every play. One of the biggest weaknesses is the positioning of U2. At present, he has a great view of about 90% of the plays at second, none of which get 24 hour play on cable. But he has a terrible view of 10% of the plays, which do get 24 hour play on cable.
I love how the umpires are getting blamed for ejecting players who throw equipment. Per written directions fom MLB, a player who throws equipment is notified of a fine for the first offense and then automatically ejected for the second. But, it's the umpire's fault when it happens. Right.
MLb instructed umpires to stop taking so much **** from players and managers this year and eject earlier in any confrontation. The umpires have follwed their instructions. So when a manager comes out to argue balls and strikes, a rule book ejection, and then tells the umpire to F-off, again, it is the umpires fault that he gets ejected. Of course.
This a more of a return to the 60's than it is a "new" approach.
quote:Originally posted by fillsfan:
That was no borderline strike on Berkman. That was a no doubt about it strike. I could see a manager getting tossed over that missed strike.
And you could tell that by the view froma camera that was not centered on the plate? You are good.
The catcher referred to it as borderline. I'll take his word for it.
I have absolutely no problem with an ump missing, blowing or simply seeing the play differently than I did on a one-off basis. Eg catch/no catch. They make mistakes, players make mistakes, managers make mistakes, the yankees keep Girardi on etc. As stated by many thats the game, part of the charm etc
What I am having trouble with is the apparent acceptance by mlb of umps with a consistently non regulation strike zone. This is readily observable to anyone watching the telecast games, both with and without the aid of the pitch track. Without the pitch track it is apparent that the umps, particularly in the twins/yanks series, are calling srikes, consistently, way outside the strike zone on one side of the plate while denying the pitch on the other side of the plate. (and I am not stupid.. I get that because they give the pitcher outside they have to give the batter something back on the inside).
With the pitch track the discepancy becomes not just apparent but glaringly so. (It also points out a surprising number of right down the pipe strikes that were apparently invisible to the ump but that is a different issue)
This is what I dont get; why does mlb put up with this? They have access to pitch track or similar technology, they have the ability to monitor and measure an umps deviation from the official zone. Why dont they act on this info to get the ump to correct his zone? Like before the playoffs even?
There is no question that this affects the play of the games. Look at the Berkman at bat; 2 pitches for called strikes outside over the line for the opposite batters box.(yes Jimmy this did/does happen). Then Pavano busts Berkman inside with a fastball that is clearly an honest-to-god-by-the-rulebook strike. Everyone in the park and everyone watching on tv knows its a strike. Berkman knows its a strike. Pavano knows its a strike, nevermind the 2 previous gifts he got he made this pitch and he wants the call...its over the plate! THE UMP knows its a strike...but he cant call it because he knows **** well that he diddled Berkman on the 2 previous unreachable "strikes". Next pitch double, Gardy tossed etc etc all because this ump is consistently and systematically calling balls well outside the zone stikes. This is not the same thing as the ump missing an occassional pitch. It is predictable, repeatable, measurable. The technology exists to demonstrate it. The ump must be teachable at some level (I mean hey, he has learned that if he calls it that far outside he cant call it on the plate inside after all)
So why does MLB put up with it?
What I am having trouble with is the apparent acceptance by mlb of umps with a consistently non regulation strike zone. This is readily observable to anyone watching the telecast games, both with and without the aid of the pitch track. Without the pitch track it is apparent that the umps, particularly in the twins/yanks series, are calling srikes, consistently, way outside the strike zone on one side of the plate while denying the pitch on the other side of the plate. (and I am not stupid.. I get that because they give the pitcher outside they have to give the batter something back on the inside).
With the pitch track the discepancy becomes not just apparent but glaringly so. (It also points out a surprising number of right down the pipe strikes that were apparently invisible to the ump but that is a different issue)
This is what I dont get; why does mlb put up with this? They have access to pitch track or similar technology, they have the ability to monitor and measure an umps deviation from the official zone. Why dont they act on this info to get the ump to correct his zone? Like before the playoffs even?
There is no question that this affects the play of the games. Look at the Berkman at bat; 2 pitches for called strikes outside over the line for the opposite batters box.(yes Jimmy this did/does happen). Then Pavano busts Berkman inside with a fastball that is clearly an honest-to-god-by-the-rulebook strike. Everyone in the park and everyone watching on tv knows its a strike. Berkman knows its a strike. Pavano knows its a strike, nevermind the 2 previous gifts he got he made this pitch and he wants the call...its over the plate! THE UMP knows its a strike...but he cant call it because he knows **** well that he diddled Berkman on the 2 previous unreachable "strikes". Next pitch double, Gardy tossed etc etc all because this ump is consistently and systematically calling balls well outside the zone stikes. This is not the same thing as the ump missing an occassional pitch. It is predictable, repeatable, measurable. The technology exists to demonstrate it. The ump must be teachable at some level (I mean hey, he has learned that if he calls it that far outside he cant call it on the plate inside after all)
So why does MLB put up with it?
Golly, Mr. Noreplay...you mean the pitches really weren't 18 inches outside as you first claimed?
I tivo'd the game to compare with your third and latest version. I'll wait for the 4th...you might get closer to the facts.
I tivo'd the game to compare with your third and latest version. I'll wait for the 4th...you might get closer to the facts.
part of the problem lies with the fact that the camera angle from the outfield is not from dead center, so what appears to be a strike on the black, could simply be an illusion...
quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:
Golly, Mr. Noreplay...you mean the pitches really weren't 18 inches outside as you first claimed?
I tivo'd the game to compare with your third and latest version. I'll wait for the 4th...you might get closer to the facts.
Jimy u seem stuck on attacking me.
Chill, Im not TR
any comment on the question I asked? If not, did you have any reason whatsoever to post other than reflexive defense of the fratermity?
Whattya think about this?
http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...lb_1%2F&prevDate=107
Awful lot of green inside? Awful lot of Red outside
?
Gee maybe its not all about me huh?
EDIT:
or this
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5662238
a few other notmes seem to have identified a few issues
Stop trying to bully k?
A question for the umpires who post here...
This might have been mantioned before, but I missed it... Are you guys in favor of some form of replay based on the technology we have available?
It seems to me that it would improve the game. It would benefit players, coaches, maybe even fans, and for sure the umpires.
Odd how College and NFL referees aren't the topic of discussion these days. At least as much as they used to be.
Everyone is capable of missing bang-bang plays. Even the very best umpires, just like players, have good and bad days.
If we had replay over the past two days, there would have been some reversals. If that would have happened we might not have people thinking the umpires are incompetent.
BTW, Does anyone here really beleive that Major League umpires are incompetent? If so, that really confuses me. They don't just pick names out of hat and call them a MLB umpire. I'm truly hoping they are among the best in the world at what they do.
I ask again... no one answered the first time... Other than the money why would anyone want to be an umpire? Of course, I'm sure glad that many do want to umpire.
This might have been mantioned before, but I missed it... Are you guys in favor of some form of replay based on the technology we have available?
It seems to me that it would improve the game. It would benefit players, coaches, maybe even fans, and for sure the umpires.
Odd how College and NFL referees aren't the topic of discussion these days. At least as much as they used to be.
Everyone is capable of missing bang-bang plays. Even the very best umpires, just like players, have good and bad days.
If we had replay over the past two days, there would have been some reversals. If that would have happened we might not have people thinking the umpires are incompetent.
BTW, Does anyone here really beleive that Major League umpires are incompetent? If so, that really confuses me. They don't just pick names out of hat and call them a MLB umpire. I'm truly hoping they are among the best in the world at what they do.
I ask again... no one answered the first time... Other than the money why would anyone want to be an umpire? Of course, I'm sure glad that many do want to umpire.
-Quote by Mr. Jerry Fordquote:This might have been mantioned before, but I missed it... Are you guys in favor of some form of replay based on the technology we have available?
I say yes. Hunter W. will never be Harry W.; that's just one example of incompetency in umpiring. Just because your daddy was a great umpire, doesn't make you one.
Get the call right. If it takes replays to cover-up incompetency; so-be-it!
Utilize advanced technology! By all means! I do it every single day and MLB should do it too!
fathertime,
So not to confuse anyone, I do not believe that MLB umpires are incompetent in any way. I just think anyone is going to make some mistakes based on how tough the job is. I don't think that NFL officials are incompetent either, but the replay can correct a few mistakes that are inevitably going to happen.
I’m not talking about replay at all levels, that would be impossible. But there is so much at stake in MLB.
If cameras can be used to show everyone that umpires made a mistake, why not use them to correct that mistake? Is it because we would then have less to b*tch about?
Besides I think the replays would prove just how good these MLB umpires are, just like it proves just how good the football officials are (no one is perfect). Seems odd to actually have the technology and not utilize it. I’m old school, but also realize the game can always get better.
Baseball was #1 when I was young, now football is more popular (based on attendance and TV ratings). Football decided to use the available technology and the game keeps getting bigger. The replays actually become an interesting segment of the game. Fans see the replays and still don’t always agree on what they see, after looking at it from multiple angles and slow motion. I believe the replays have become a form of entertainment all by themself.
There are ways to use replay that wouldn't take very long or disrupt the game. A lot less time than the actual arguments that follow these calls.
They are only necessary once in awhile. Usually only when the manager come out on the field to argue. If you think about it, that really doesn't happen much in every game, but when it does it takes much more time than reviewing the play and getting it right would.
Technology will never replace umpires. They have the exact same job. It would just help to get the call right. I fail to see how that could have "any" negative affect on baseball. In fact, I think it would help improve baseball. Anyway, it's inevitable, it's going to happen some day.
Not so many years ago before technology stepped in, we couldn't talk to people from coast to coast about these things like we do now. Was that better or worse?
So not to confuse anyone, I do not believe that MLB umpires are incompetent in any way. I just think anyone is going to make some mistakes based on how tough the job is. I don't think that NFL officials are incompetent either, but the replay can correct a few mistakes that are inevitably going to happen.
I’m not talking about replay at all levels, that would be impossible. But there is so much at stake in MLB.
If cameras can be used to show everyone that umpires made a mistake, why not use them to correct that mistake? Is it because we would then have less to b*tch about?
Besides I think the replays would prove just how good these MLB umpires are, just like it proves just how good the football officials are (no one is perfect). Seems odd to actually have the technology and not utilize it. I’m old school, but also realize the game can always get better.
Baseball was #1 when I was young, now football is more popular (based on attendance and TV ratings). Football decided to use the available technology and the game keeps getting bigger. The replays actually become an interesting segment of the game. Fans see the replays and still don’t always agree on what they see, after looking at it from multiple angles and slow motion. I believe the replays have become a form of entertainment all by themself.
There are ways to use replay that wouldn't take very long or disrupt the game. A lot less time than the actual arguments that follow these calls.
They are only necessary once in awhile. Usually only when the manager come out on the field to argue. If you think about it, that really doesn't happen much in every game, but when it does it takes much more time than reviewing the play and getting it right would.
Technology will never replace umpires. They have the exact same job. It would just help to get the call right. I fail to see how that could have "any" negative affect on baseball. In fact, I think it would help improve baseball. Anyway, it's inevitable, it's going to happen some day.
Not so many years ago before technology stepped in, we couldn't talk to people from coast to coast about these things like we do now. Was that better or worse?
It's like the number of days on a calendar; they are all numbered.
Nothing is constant but change. Change is here.
Yes I agree on PG's replay comment. No way can replays be done at all levels. That's not going to happen. The "budget" wouldn't allow it in these present day economic times. Business as usual.
But why not at least get the calls right in the playoffs when all the marbles are on the table?
Nothing is constant but change. Change is here.
Yes I agree on PG's replay comment. No way can replays be done at all levels. That's not going to happen. The "budget" wouldn't allow it in these present day economic times. Business as usual.
But why not at least get the calls right in the playoffs when all the marbles are on the table?
quote:Originally posted by MadDogPA:
part of the problem lies with the fact that the camera angle from the outfield is not from dead center, so what appears to be a strike on the black, could simply be an illusion...
I don't think it's the outfield camera angles anymore, but the new computerized Pitch Trax that the networks utilize IMO? I'm wondering how accurate it really is?
quote:Originally posted by bsbl247:quote:Originally posted by MadDogPA:
part of the problem lies with the fact that the camera angle from the outfield is not from dead center, so what appears to be a strike on the black, could simply be an illusion...
I don't think it's the outfield camera angles anymore, but the new computerized Pitch Trax that the networks utilize IMO? I'm wondering how accurate it really is?
Likewise.
Can anybody post links/studies that address this?
Jerry you make some very good points.
QuesTec, the original MLB contracted system to assess/improve umpire zones claimed an accuracy of one half inch in 2001.
Presumably the systems would be at least as accurate now.
Does MLB still use this as an umpire training tool?
Presumably the systems would be at least as accurate now.
Does MLB still use this as an umpire training tool?
quote:Originally posted by NoReplay:quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:
Golly, Mr. Noreplay...you mean the pitches really weren't 18 inches outside as you first claimed?
I tivo'd the game to compare with your third and latest version. I'll wait for the 4th...you might get closer to the facts.
Jimy u seem stuck on attacking me.
Chill, Im not TR
any comment on the question I asked? If not, did you have any reason whatsoever to post other than reflexive defense of the fratermity?
Whattya think about this?
http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...lb_1%2F&prevDate=107
Awful lot of green inside? Awful lot of Red outside
?
Gee maybe its not all about me huh?
EDIT:
or this
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5662238
a few other notmes seem to have identified a few issues
Stop trying to bully k?
Mr. No
AS others have pointed out to you in other threads, you are hanging you hat on a severly flawed system.
I haven't attacked you. I don't know you. I have attacked your post claiming that pitches 18 inches out side were called strikes during the game. I know for a fact that is incorrect.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but everyone is not entitled to their own facts.
And I agree you are not TR. TR makes sense more often.
quote:Originally posted by PGStaff:
A question for the umpires who post here...
This might have been mantioned before, but I missed it... Are you guys in favor of some form of replay based on the technology we have available?
It seems to me that it would improve the game. It would benefit players, coaches, maybe even fans, and for sure the umpires.
Odd how College and NFL referees aren't the topic of discussion these days. At least as much as they used to be.
Everyone is capable of missing bang-bang plays. Even the very best umpires, just like players, have good and bad days.
If we had replay over the past two days, there would have been some reversals. If that would have happened we might not have people thinking the umpires are incompetent.
BTW, Does anyone here really beleive that Major League umpires are incompetent? If so, that really confuses me. They don't just pick names out of hat and call them a MLB umpire. I'm truly hoping they are among the best in the world at what they do.
I ask again... no one answered the first time... Other than the money why would anyone want to be an umpire? Of course, I'm sure glad that many do want to umpire.
PG:
Replay is coming. No denying it. But, unless the networks seriously reposition some cameras, replay should be limited to fair/foul, HR/Ground Rule Double, HBP.
The cameras as of now do not show wht an Umpire can see and hear on the bases...they could with some repositioning.
As for catch/no catch, cameras are incapable of the judgement the rule book calls for regrading release of the ball.
quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:quote:Originally posted by NoReplay:quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:
Golly, Mr. Noreplay...you mean the pitches really weren't 18 inches outside as you first claimed?
I tivo'd the game to compare with your third and latest version. I'll wait for the 4th...you might get closer to the facts.
Jimy u seem stuck on attacking me.
Chill, Im not TR
any comment on the question I asked? If not, did you have any reason whatsoever to post other than reflexive defense of the fratermity?
Whattya think about this?
http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...lb_1%2F&prevDate=107
Awful lot of green inside? Awful lot of Red outside
?
Gee maybe its not all about me huh?
EDIT:
or this
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5662238
a few other notmes seem to have identified a few issues
Stop trying to bully k?
Mr. No
AS others have pointed out to you in other threads, you are hanging you hat on a severly flawed system.
I haven't attacked you. I don't know you. I have attacked your post claiming that pitches 18 inches out side were called strikes during the game. I know for a fact that is incorrect.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but everyone is not entitled to their own facts.
And I agree you are not TR. TR makes sense more often.
Ok "Mr Jimmy" you are pretty much proving you are incapable of discussing the issue itself. Yes you have attacked me and this post is yet another attack, with the ongoing "declining dimunitive" treatment of my onscreen nick, the condescending tone etc.
My initial post on this topic did say 5-6 balls of the plate. Thats called hyperbole. Dash called me on it and asked me if I wished to restate that and I said yes....3 balls off thanks. To borrow your phrase...Move on.
You have since refused to address the actual issue but keep bringing back the 18 inches...maybe because there is no rational way of actually defending the zone called? Lets make it direct and simple. Do you think the balls outside off the plate called strikes were, by any definition other than the fact that the ump called them strikes, actually strikes? If you dont like the 9 or 18 inch number, how many inches off the plate do you think they were? How many inches off the plate is acceptable?
Nobody, in any other thread, has pointed out to me that I am "hanging you hat on a severly flawed system". I have only posted on one other thread (yours). Closest was a comment "we all know how reliable pitch trackers are". Really? How accurate are they? MLB, thru QuesTec, says theirs is accurate to 1/2 inch. I dont know so I asked if anyone else does. Still waiting. Do you know?
The brooks site linked in my post above shows hendlestadt calling 14 -15 pitches well out of the zone strikes outside while there are at least 10 strikes called balls inside. thats one game, and only refers to called strikes not swinging. Thats at least one blown call for each hitter on average. Care to address that instead of attacking me?
With respect to "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but everyone is not entitled to their own facts."
Couldnt agree more. The problem is that you think that your opinion=fact. Flash dude that only works when you are umping and you can rule rather than reason.
quote:Originally posted by fillsfan:
That was no borderline strike on Berkman. That was a no doubt about it strike. I could see a manager getting tossed over that missed strike.
I thought it was an excellent pitch for a strike and I thought for sure Berkman got rung up and should have. And i'm a Yankee fan so I'm not saying it was a good call because it wasn't. However, It was fun to see that skunk Pavano who for the Yankees was a useful as teats on a bull get burned on that pitch. He basically wore a ski mask and looted the Bronx Bombers for 4 years.
quote:Originally posted by PGStaff:
A question for the umpires who post here...
This might have been mantioned before, but I missed it... Are you guys in favor of some form of replay based on the technology we have available?
I ask again... no one answered the first time... Other than the money why would anyone want to be an umpire? Of course, I'm sure glad that many do want to umpire.
Ok Jerry, here are my answers......
I am for instant replay for MLB in dead ball situations....baseball is a game of continuing action and the rule book relies on umpire judgement in many cases so I would hope that they will take those issues in account .....there will need to be some superior baseball minds involved to determine where, when and how technology can be inserted without undue loss of continuity or the spirit if the game...
I agree that it is inevitible as the technology has become so advanced with the HD super slo motion that errors can be seen that can not be reasonably seen by the human eye....Umpires get one shot at a call, at game speed....
Now I have no dog in this hunt.....I am a small time HS/small college umpire and this technology most likely will never be available at my levels.....
No umpire I ever knew wants to be wrong...we want to get the call right..I know I do....I train hard every year, go to advanced clinics, call balls/strikes in the cage in the winter for my sons D3 to hone my skills....all so the product I put on the field is the best I can do....and with all that a slo motion HD camera can tell which got there first, the ball in the glove or the foot on the base.... just a fact...the MLB umpires deserve to have this burden of perceived incompetency removed from them....
As to why I umpire....
My first job out of college took me to where I didnt know a soul...too late to be added to the corporate softball team I saw an ad for umpires for the local rec leagues.....all for the princely sum of $6.50 a game....I had been stopping by to watch the kids play anyway...when you love the game, the lights of a ballfield draw you like a moth to the porch light anyway....
I found that along with loving the game and the kids, that I had a knack for umpiring...as an ex-catcher, I knew the game and had a pretty good strike zone for a raw untrained rookie umpire....
I had the opportunity to see some fine American Legion umpires do a game after mine and I was taken by the difference between them and me. I wanted to do the job like they did...the kids I umpired deserved it...so I approached them and got my first lesson in what a real umpire is...
I found I that I enjoyed the science of umpiring (mechanics) and the art of umpiring (calling balls and strikes)and there is a personal satisfaction of a well run ballgame ....I also found I had the temprement for the game as well......my personality fits in well with the aspects of baseball at my current levels....
The money aspect is there, yet I no longer have to use umpiring money to pay for diapers and formula...I do not umpire for free....I am a trained umpire, insured and certified at the levels I do and am worthy of my hire....
Today, I am just a working umpire....a HS rules interpreter and Umpire instructor, chapter officer and evaluator.....and when I feel I can no longer do these things competently for levels I call, then I'll call it a career.....
The Umpire Strikes Again!!!
Giants vs Braves
SS makes nice play for SF, throws to 1B. Foot clearly off the bag and runner called out.
WOW..these guys in blue all over the league are bad. What's going on here.
How much incompetance could be stood in MLB playoff baseball rounds?
Are these guys in shape to get to the proper positiuon to make the right calls?
Umpires for sure need to take a physical and should be in good shape to run and be athletic enough to be in position. As well as their eyes being checked.
Look at an NBA ref. Even the old goats in the league are in top shape to run with those players..While a MLB ump don't need to condition like an NBA ref, they should be in top shape to do their job.
They need a lot of help.
Time to bring in instant replay and not just for blown home run calls.
The technology is there..They need to use it.
Giants vs Braves
SS makes nice play for SF, throws to 1B. Foot clearly off the bag and runner called out.
WOW..these guys in blue all over the league are bad. What's going on here.
How much incompetance could be stood in MLB playoff baseball rounds?
Are these guys in shape to get to the proper positiuon to make the right calls?
Umpires for sure need to take a physical and should be in good shape to run and be athletic enough to be in position. As well as their eyes being checked.
Look at an NBA ref. Even the old goats in the league are in top shape to run with those players..While a MLB ump don't need to condition like an NBA ref, they should be in top shape to do their job.
They need a lot of help.
Time to bring in instant replay and not just for blown home run calls.
The technology is there..They need to use it.
You must be a zomby if you think NBA refs are better than MLB umps. NBA is a joke.
quote:Originally posted by NoReplay:
The brooks site linked in my post above shows hendlestadt calling 14 -15 pitches well out of the zone strikes outside while there are at least 10 strikes called balls inside. thats one game, and only refers to called strikes not swinging. Thats at least one blown call for each hitter on average. Care to address that instead of attacking me?
As you've been informed before, the Brooks site is seriously flawed and not taken as accurate by anyone with any experience or sense.
The "one blown call for each hitter on average" claim is on par with your initial claim of pitches 18 inches of the plate. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to debate facts not fanboy hyperbole.
Come back when you're ready to be serious. I have excellent relationships with Coach May, Coach 2709 and PGStaff and others who speak thoughtfully, seriously know what they are talking about,and don't lie or exaggerate, regardless of the side they represent.
Giants v Braves
PLate ump
pitch trx shows he is incredibly "on" so far
very consistent
a treat
Edit
Sorry Jimmy missed your post
you are still slinging ****
NOBODY has informed me of any such thing, closest was you saying something about not understanding it?
Fanboy? How would that apply here? Fan to accuracy?
Good Umping?
"I enjoy my conversations here with coaches and others who speak respectfully and seriously know what they are talking about, regardless of the side they represent." I get that, you enjoy talking to sycophants.
With regards to knowing what I am talking about...
I asked why mlb, apparently in possession of tools to intervene, allowed this to continue unchecked. Key word is ASKED.
See, that is a question. I was hoping for some factual info,as you would maybe expect to find on a site like this...u know, educational?
Instead I got you with all your attitude saying there is no problem, only idiots on message boards think there is a problem. Thanks vey much. Value your input. Know exactly where you are coming from now wont ask u anything again yessir.
Well maybe one more thing. Do you have any actual data or evidence that the brooks site you slander is "seriously flawed". Not your opinion please. Maybe a link to something a little more substantive?
Piece a work you are alright.
LOL second EDit:
Ha I see what u did there Jimmy!
Just so everybody here is clear, the names Jimmy included in his post above were added AFTER I made the sycophants comment, not before and I in no way endorse his implications.
Here is what he said pre his stealth edit:
"I enjoy my conversations here with coaches and others who speak respectfully and seriously know what they are talking about, regardless of the side they represent"
You are indeed a piece of work dude
PLate ump
pitch trx shows he is incredibly "on" so far
very consistent
a treat
Edit
Sorry Jimmy missed your post
you are still slinging ****
NOBODY has informed me of any such thing, closest was you saying something about not understanding it?
Fanboy? How would that apply here? Fan to accuracy?
Good Umping?
"I enjoy my conversations here with coaches and others who speak respectfully and seriously know what they are talking about, regardless of the side they represent." I get that, you enjoy talking to sycophants.
With regards to knowing what I am talking about...
I asked why mlb, apparently in possession of tools to intervene, allowed this to continue unchecked. Key word is ASKED.
See, that is a question. I was hoping for some factual info,as you would maybe expect to find on a site like this...u know, educational?
Instead I got you with all your attitude saying there is no problem, only idiots on message boards think there is a problem. Thanks vey much. Value your input. Know exactly where you are coming from now wont ask u anything again yessir.
Well maybe one more thing. Do you have any actual data or evidence that the brooks site you slander is "seriously flawed". Not your opinion please. Maybe a link to something a little more substantive?
Piece a work you are alright.
LOL second EDit:
Ha I see what u did there Jimmy!
Just so everybody here is clear, the names Jimmy included in his post above were added AFTER I made the sycophants comment, not before and I in no way endorse his implications.
Here is what he said pre his stealth edit:
"I enjoy my conversations here with coaches and others who speak respectfully and seriously know what they are talking about, regardless of the side they represent"
You are indeed a piece of work dude
quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:quote:Originally posted by NoReplay:
The brooks site linked in my post above shows hendlestadt calling 14 -15 pitches well out of the zone strikes outside while there are at least 10 strikes called balls inside. thats one game, and only refers to called strikes not swinging. Thats at least one blown call for each hitter on average. Care to address that instead of attacking me?
As you've been informed before, the Brooks site is seriously flawed and not taken as accurate by anyone with any experience or sense.
The "one blown call for each hitter on average" claim is on par with your initial claim of pitches 18 inches of the plate. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to debate facts not fanboy hyperbole.
Come back when you're ready to be serious. I enjoy my conversations here with coaches and others who speak respectfully and seriously know what they are talking about, regardless of the side they represent.
And agree that you are 100% the authority on all things umpire related?
PG made some good points but I also think so did piaa_ump.
We are all expecting the umps to see in a split second what we see in HD solo motion. Impossible.
If we went back through time and looked at all games with the same technology as we have today, perhaps we might consider some of the very best umpires incompetent as well.
It's not really fair to judge the human eye with today's technology is it?. Using this technology on every suspect call would definetly stop the continuity.
JMO.
We are all expecting the umps to see in a split second what we see in HD solo motion. Impossible.
If we went back through time and looked at all games with the same technology as we have today, perhaps we might consider some of the very best umpires incompetent as well.
It's not really fair to judge the human eye with today's technology is it?. Using this technology on every suspect call would definetly stop the continuity.
JMO.
quote:Originally posted by bsballfan:
And agree that you are 100% the authority on all things umpire related?
well, for what its worth, He is the most qualified / best trained/ and highest level umpire we have ever had on the HSBBW staff.....
quote:Originally posted by Tx-Husker:
You must be a zomby if you think NBA refs are better than MLB umps. NBA is a joke.
Better..No way..NBA refs use the star system. But they do get up and down the court tho
quote:Originally posted by piaa_ump:quote:Originally posted by bsballfan:
And agree that you are 100% the authority on all things umpire related?
well, for what its worth, He is the most qualified / best trained/ and highest level umpire we have ever had on the HSBBW staff.....
Great, awesome, doesn't give you the right to be arrogant and condescending.