Umpires, MLB sign agreement on instant replay
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Al4Frtfr.7WuY.E5g0xG4WQ5nYcB?slug=ap-instantreplay&prov=ap&type=lgns

WTF...umpires are (basically) employees...they should do what they're told
and that's the way it will be...(or they're OUTTA here...)
They hold way too much power over the outcome of games...

Are they (the umpires) so blind they can't see that it's their own lousy
track record that has outraged so many that cameras are needed to back them
up and rectify the plethora of bad calls they make...

Bring on the electronic strike zone... it's time to put the game back in the
hands of the players and let them play by the clearly defined rules of the
game and not every other umpires interpretation of the rules and strike
zone...!

"chuck" <chuck@chuckroast.net> wrote in message
news:g8ij5i$dbt$1@aioe.org...
> Umpires, MLB sign agreement on instant replay
> http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Al4Frtfr.7WuY.E5g0xG4WQ5nYcB?slug=ap-instantreplay&prov=ap&type=lgns
>
> WTF...umpires are (basically) employees...they should do what they're told
> and that's the way it will be...(or they're OUTTA here...)
> They hold way too much power over the outcome of games...
>
> Are they (the umpires) so blind they can't see that it's their own lousy
> track record that has outraged so many that cameras are needed to back
> them
> up and rectify the plethora of bad calls they make...
>
> Bring on the electronic strike zone... it's time to put the game back in
> the
> hands of the players and let them play by the clearly defined rules of the
> game and not every other umpires interpretation of the rules and strike
> zone...!

Common Chuck, dealing with an umpire's strike zone is on the shoulders of
the hitter. If the guy has a questionable strike zone, swing the bat.
Hitters learn the tendencies of certain umpires, and need to keep them in
mind when stepping into the box.

Electronic strike zones putting the game 'back in the hands of the players',
makes little sense. I don't think Abner Doubleday mentioned electronic
strike zones.

I think an umpire should have the luxury of going to a replay if he so
chooses, but beyond that, let's keep the human element in the game.

>>>I don't think Abner Doubleday mentioned electronic
strike zones.<<<

No he was too busy arranging 'wagon train' transportation for the traveling
teams...

What it comes down to is the possibility of a bad call costing a deserving
team from continuing or being eliminated from a playoff or championship
series (or game). IMO, measures should be taken by whatever means available
to eliminate that possibility.

There will always be the need for human officials...there is no need for
guess work or variables in administering the rules during a game though.

If a laser can tell 100% with ZERO doubt whether or not the ball crosses
over any part of the plate...why rely on the varying eyesight and judgment
of a human when technology can remove any and all doubt? There are still
many calls technology can't make...by eliminating the ones that technology
can cover allows the officials to concentrate more on making correct calls
when they do come into play...

The Game of Baseball (the way Doubleday meant it to be played) is about the
players and the play on the field...not the officiating...nothing is worse
for the game than a bad call...little else is worse on the planet than a bad
call costing a team a possible championship or a chance to compete for
one...

IMO, if an umpire or any other sporting official's number one priority is
not to get every call they have to make right (by any means) then their
priorities are wrong and they do not belong in an officiating position.
Umpires and other game officials should welcome technology...

It seems funny to me that 99.9% of the sporting world greets new technology
with open arms...just look how technology has improved almost every athletic
and non-athletic sporting activity on the planet...there is only one reason
world records are broken..."TECHNOLOGY"...
So why is it the only part of the sporting world (1%) that does not embrace
technology are the officials? We embrace technology because it makes us
better (in every aspect of life)...the racing (horse, autos et.al) world has
used cameras to eliminate doubt ever since they were available...many do not
realize that sports/athletics were/are the motive behind a lot of
technology...i.e, stopwatch...

We do have night baseball, they do have lights and television...managers
don't have to use smoke signals to call up a new arm from the bullpen...hell
I bet even the umpires fly from series to series and probably even ride in
automobiles from their accommodations to the park...IMO it's about time they
(the umpires and MLB) wakes up and realize it's time to eliminate as many of
the injustices that bad calls are responsible for...

On the ball field there is plenty of room for human error (they keep
statistics) there is NO room for errors in officiating...especially if they
have technology to prevent them...

"chuck" <chuck@chuckroast.net> wrote in message
news:g8jsta$itk$1@aioe.org...
>>>>I don't think Abner Doubleday mentioned electronic
> strike zones.<<<
>
> No he was too busy arranging 'wagon train' transportation for the
> traveling
> teams...
>
> What it comes down to is the possibility of a bad call costing a deserving
> team from continuing or being eliminated from a playoff or championship
> series (or game). IMO, measures should be taken by whatever means
> available
> to eliminate that possibility.
>
> There will always be the need for human officials...there is no need for
> guess work or variables in administering the rules during a game though.
>
> If a laser can tell 100% with ZERO doubt whether or not the ball crosses
> over any part of the plate...why rely on the varying eyesight and judgment
> of a human when technology can remove any and all doubt? There are still
> many calls technology can't make...by eliminating the ones that technology
> can cover allows the officials to concentrate more on making correct calls
> when they do come into play...
>
> The Game of Baseball (the way Doubleday meant it to be played) is about
> the
> players and the play on the field...not the officiating...nothing is worse
> for the game than a bad call...little else is worse on the planet than a
> bad
> call costing a team a possible championship or a chance to compete for
> one...
>
> IMO, if an umpire or any other sporting official's number one priority is
> not to get every call they have to make right (by any means) then their
> priorities are wrong and they do not belong in an officiating position.
> Umpires and other game officials should welcome technology...
>
> It seems funny to me that 99.9% of the sporting world greets new
> technology
> with open arms...just look how technology has improved almost every
> athletic
> and non-athletic sporting activity on the planet...there is only one
> reason
> world records are broken..."TECHNOLOGY"...
> So why is it the only part of the sporting world (1%) that does not
> embrace
> technology are the officials? We embrace technology because it makes us
> better (in every aspect of life)...the racing (horse, autos et.al) world
> has
> used cameras to eliminate doubt ever since they were available...many do
> not
> realize that sports/athletics were/are the motive behind a lot of
> technology...i.e, stopwatch...
>
> We do have night baseball, they do have lights and television...managers
> don't have to use smoke signals to call up a new arm from the
> bullpen...hell
> I bet even the umpires fly from series to series and probably even ride in
> automobiles from their accommodations to the park...IMO it's about time
> they
> (the umpires and MLB) wakes up and realize it's time to eliminate as many
> of
> the injustices that bad calls are responsible for...
>
> On the ball field there is plenty of room for human error (they keep
> statistics) there is NO room for errors in officiating...especially if
> they
> have technology to prevent them...
>

Sure there is room for human error. The probability is that it can work for
you, as much as against you. As an athlete, you are taught, never leave the
game in a position where it can be decided by an official.

And I'm not so sure that it has improved everything. I'm sick of sitting
through NFL games with an official having his head buried under a hood
watching a replay for five minutes.

As far as replays go, most of them show that umpires do a pretty good job.

>>>Sure there is room for human error<<<

There is no room for injustice...especially if it's avoidable...

>>>The probability is that it can work for
you, as much as against you<<<

Applying the chaos theory to an athletic competition where there are
supposed to be un-biased officials (who are supposed to enforce the clearly
defined rules) is ludicrous at best...especially when it comes to
professional sports where there is a playoff system...i.e., one team gets
"their" bad call during the regular season when the game means little if
anything but the "other" team gets "its" bad call during a divisional or
other playoff game and gets eliminated because of it...I don't think so...

>>>most of them show that umpires do a pretty good job<<<

This is a professional activity "most" is not good enough and a "pretty good
job" does not cut it...

It's like I said...professional sports officials are probably the only group
of gainfully employed individuals (collectively) in the world that don't
want anything (especially technology) that will help them do their job
better...now what is wrong with that picture?...

....sort of sounds similar to dyed in the wool politicians that refuse to
pass term limit legislation...whomever said that "power corrupts" was either
a concerned voter or a sports fan...!

"chuck" <chuck@chuckroast.net> wrote in message
news:g8kbug$knv$1@aioe.org...
>>>>Sure there is room for human error<<<
>
> There is no room for injustice...especially if it's avoidable...
>
>>>>The probability is that it can work for
> you, as much as against you<<<
>
> Applying the chaos theory to an athletic competition where there are
> supposed to be un-biased officials (who are supposed to enforce the
> clearly
> defined rules) is ludicrous at best...especially when it comes to
> professional sports where there is a playoff system...i.e., one team gets
> "their" bad call during the regular season when the game means little if
> anything but the "other" team gets "its" bad call during a divisional or
> other playoff game and gets eliminated because of it...I don't think so...
>
>>>>most of them show that umpires do a pretty good job<<<
>
> This is a professional activity "most" is not good enough and a "pretty
> good
> job" does not cut it...
>
> It's like I said...professional sports officials are probably the only
> group
> of gainfully employed individuals (collectively) in the world that don't
> want anything (especially technology) that will help them do their job
> better...now what is wrong with that picture?...
>
> ...sort of sounds similar to dyed in the wool politicians that refuse to
> pass term limit legislation...whomever said that "power corrupts" was
> either
> a concerned voter or a sports fan...!

Having been a professional baseball player, I can tell for a fact that you
are overweighing the issue.

>>>Having been a professional baseball player, I can tell for a fact that
you
are overweighing the issue. <<<

how long did you play and in what organization?

I'm basing what I was ranting about on what I learned from a professional
scout that worked directly for George Steinbrenner...This guy was one of the
smartest people I have ever met.... after one of the times George fired him
he started one of the first semi-conductor wholesale outfits with a global
market and the guy made millions...but he still handicapped high school and
college players and George was always calling him...he would always put it
on speaker phone if there was anyone around to impress... I believe 100%
what this guy told be about "inside baseball"

"chuck" <chuck@chuckroast.net> wrote in message
news:g8ld45$in2$1@aioe.org...
>>>>Having been a professional baseball player, I can tell for a fact that
> you
> are overweighing the issue. <<<
>
> how long did you play and in what organization?
>
> I'm basing what I was ranting about on what I learned from a professional
> scout that worked directly for George Steinbrenner...This guy was one of
> the
> smartest people I have ever met.... after one of the times George fired
> him
> he started one of the first semi-conductor wholesale outfits with a global
> market and the guy made millions...but he still handicapped high school
> and
> college players and George was always calling him...he would always put it
> on speaker phone if there was anyone around to impress... I believe 100%
> what this guy told be about "inside baseball"

I played 1 year in the San Francisco Giants organization.

I'm not discounting what this other person may have told you, but it's just
not a major issue with the sport.

We were taught situational hitting. The situation could change with each
and every pitch. We had a minimum that we were to attempt to accomplish in
a plate appearance. If you didn't at least attempt to accomplish that
minimum, you were fined.

In other words, if I was supposed to hit the ball behind the runner at first
base, and hit into a DP started by the third baseman, I could expect the old
man to meet me at the top step, with an ass chewing and a fine.

Beyond the situational hitting, we went to the plate with the 'hitting
window' theory. If we were even or ahead in the count, we were to read
strike zone minus. We looked for a ball in our favorite zone, or a ball to
hit to the right side etc. Two strikes was ALWAYS strike zone plus. You
swing at everything in the zone or slightly out of the zone. Called strike
three was a fine. Don't take called strike three, and walk back telling the
manager that it was three inches outside. He would double the fine.

The standard fine was $25. I made a whopping $314/mo. I didn't get fined,
I couldn't afford it!

But when we got together before a game to discuss the starting pitcher and
probable relievers, we also talked about the plate umpire. The old man
would say, "This guy likes the high strike. Don't take a called one
upstairs, then piss and moan about it. You've been warned!" Most of the
umps were similar. I always felt like bonus baby pitchers got a little
bigger zone.

The best way to protect yourself, don't get into a two-strike hole. Swing
the bat! It's not a perfect system, but it's surly not broke, so it doesn't
need immediate fixing.

The biggest threat to professional baseball is money. MLB needs a salary
cap. Put the teams on a level playing field. Make GM's do their job of
assembling a team with similar budgets. Profit share? Eh. I don't know why
the Rays should get a cut of the Yankee profits. A cap would be enough to
do the trick.

Don't get too worked up over balls and strikes. Enjoy the game.

>>>Don't get too worked up over balls and strikes<<<

My point is not about balls and strikes per se...
it's about "BAD CALLS" whether they're made because of human error or by
design...if they can be eliminated by technology they should be...it would
only add to the credibility of the game...not detract from it...!