It's disturbing to me that MLB hasn't done two things. First, it has been reluctant to acknowledge, either openly or to itself (so far as I know), that home plate umpiring is often pretty bad and occasionally terrible. I don't know whether the umpiring has gotten worse in the last few years, but now all umpiring errors on balls snd strikes are highly visible on TV and online, and a lot of fans are unhappy about it, especially when the bad calls are made at critical points in a game or playoff series or season. It doesn't help that national TV announcers never directly criticize umpiring, other than in code like "The Rays may have gotten a break there," or "That one was really close, could have gone either way," or "He's giving pitchers the low strike," or "Great framing job gets the strike call." You never hear, "Wow. The plate umpire missed another one. He's having a real bad night."
Second, MLB seems committed to doing very little or nothing to improve the situation. If the problem with improving the game stems from the rights of or threats from the umpires' union, that should be met head-on rather than used as an excuse for doing nothing.
Like a lot of fans, I think the answer is electronic umpiring for balls and strikes, and I understand that the technology exists to determine immediately whether any part of a pitched ball entered the three-dimensional strike zone. (It's fine with me if the plane from which the strike zone extends is changed from a pentagon to a rectangle.) But I don't know where that technology is because MLB doesn't talk about it. (Or maybe it has and I've missed the discussion.)
I am guessing that, even if the technology is now in place and seems usable, it will take a couple of years, or maybe more, from the public introduction of an electronic system to its use in major league games. During that time the system would be tested and evaluated in non-MLB games, and bugs in and complaints about it would be worked out. Over time, the new, more accurate system would be improved, and would be accepted or rejected. That clock should be running. (Granted, 2020 may have halted the testing since there were no minor lague or AFL games.) Yet MLB appears to be taking no steps to test electronic ball-and-strike technology under game circumstances.
If MLB has resolved for some reason to stick with human umpiring for a while, it should consider suggestions to try to improve the quality of ball-and-strike calls. There are lots of ways to try to do this. For example, MLB could:
Get rid of umpires, or exempt them from home-plate duty, if their objectively scored performance deteriorates as they get older (perfectly legal)
Identify and recruit the best umpires from outside the U.S.
Instruct umpires that they are to follow the strike zone as it's defined in the rulebook, rather than utilize personalized strike zones
Instruct catchers that they are to try to keep their gloves where they catch the ball, and that intentiionally moving the glove into the strike zone will (a) result in a ball being called and (b) be grounds for a warning and then for ejection.
Set up the assignments so that really bad ball-and-strike umpires like Buckner and Hudson aren't behind the plate in postseason games
Permit, with some limits, catchers and batters to argue over strike calls, or at least create and enforce uniformly a set of rules for those arguments
Have all checked-swing calls made by the appropriate base umpire, with no appeal requirement
Have balls and strikes called by two umpires, one behind the plate calling whether a pitch passes over the plate and a second stationed in front of the stands, at ground level, directly to the side of home plate (or elsewhere, with a monitor to get that view) calling whether a pitch is high or low and immediately communicate that electronically to the other umpire.
Calling balls and strikes is difficult, and always has been. But it's also important and causing problems for the game, at leat in my opinion. There are steps that might improve the situation. Doing nothing isn't one of them.