Time for umps to be replaced.

[PA724_Oriole]

Technically, a player, coach, or manager is not allowed to argue balls and strikes. It is and has always been punishable by ejection. It does not matter if the players or fans think that they are right in arguing the ball/strike call.

Doesn't mean it's right. And I've seen managers and players argue pitches without being tossed. Maybe not actually argue intensely, but at least have a few words.

The best umps I've ever seen were ones that called the games for my team's regionals in Emporium, PA.

I might not have agreed with their zones but they were consistent.

Idc if s ump has a big or small strike zone but whatever it is, keep it the same throughout the entirety of the game.

Shouldn't be that hard.

[russ snyder]

Doesn't mean it's right. And I've seen managers and players argue pitches without being tossed. Maybe not actually argue intensely, but at least have a few words.

The best umps I've ever seen were ones that called the games for my team's regionals in Emporium, PA.

I might not have agreed with their zones but they were consistent.

Idc if s ump has a big or small strike zone but whatever it is, keep it the same throughout the entirety of the game.

Shouldn't be that hard.

Most good umpires let a few comments about balls and strikes go. Others will give the bench or player a warning before tossing them.

However, whether you think it's right or not arguing balls and strikes can get you ejected. If they allowed balls and strikes to be argued as nauseum, we'd have 6 to 7 hour games.

Even the most consistent umpire is going to miss a call now and then. They are human beings, and I believe that it's a tougher job than you think..

[El Gordo]

Robo Ump would speed up the game.

[russ snyder]

Robo Ump would speed up the game.

Maybe. I think things like enforcing the rule that pitchers must deliver the pitch within twenty seconds after receiving the balll with no runners on, and making hitters keep at least one foot in the box while receiving signs would speed the game up more than robo ump. i don't want to derail the thread, so I won't give my thoughts on "walk up" music.

[The Wedge]

Maybe. I think things like enforcing the rule that pitchers must deliver the pitch within twenty seconds after receiving the balll with no runners on, and making hitters keep at least one foot in the box while receiving signs would speed the game up more than robo ump. i don't want to derail the thread, so I won't give my thoughts on "walk up" music.

To be fair, walk up music isn't delaying things. The batters move up to bat at the same pace either way. The other things, right there with you, brother.

[russ snyder]

To be fair, walk up music isn't delaying things. The batters move up to bat at the same pace either way. The other things, right there with you, brother.

Maybe they could just play the music before the batter's first appearance of the game. While it probably does not hold the game up much, I fail to see the point after the first AB.

[PA724_Oriole]

Wow. I'm not saying they should be allowed to argue. I say it's not fair when the player is 100% right, gets ejected. The player misses x amount.of innings when he shouldnt have and the ump gets nothing wether.he was right or wrong.

I think ppl give umps a pass.more than they should.

Its.hard to see/call xertain fouls in bball...shouldnt be hard to see if a ball is a strike or ball.

[PA724_Oriole]

Some of these umps been doing this for years. And they still have trouble figuring out wether a pitch was in "their personal" strike zone or not? Give me a break.

You know why that is? Because there isnt a league wide understanding of what an actual strike is.because they get to make their own.

And everyone always brings up the timing of the game "if they were allowed to argue at nauseam, it would add 6 hours to the game" yada yada yada...

If they replaced umps with computers and it was accurate there would be NO arguing to be done. And there would be NO unnecessary ejections. And the game would run SMOOTHER and FASTER.

I mean how can a player argue with a computer?

[The Wedge]

Maybe they could just play the music before the batter's first appearance of the game. While it probably does not hold the game up much, I fail to see the point after the first AB.

Well, after the first AB they don't always play the specific walk up music. All that's really for the fans, anyway.

[The Wedge]

Some of these umps been doing this for years. And they still have trouble figuring out wether a pitch was in "their personal" strike zone or not? Give me a break.

You know why that is? Because there isnt a league wide understanding of what an actual strike is.because they get to make their own.

And everyone always brings up the timing of the game "if they were allowed to argue at nauseam, it would add 6 hours to the game" yada yada yada...

If they replaced umps with computers and it was accurate there would be NO arguing to be done. And there would be NO unnecessary ejections. And the game would run SMOOTHER and FASTER.

I mean how can a player argue with a computer?

THIS COMPUTER IS IMPROPERLY CALIBRATED! THAT ZONE IS ALL OVER THE PLACE!

Something like that.

[Camden_yardbird]

Realistically, Buck needs to stop respecting the umps so much. That pick off should have been challenged, it would have changed the complexion of the inning and the momentum. If I were Brach I would be pissed at Buck.

[PaulFolk]

Realistically, Buck needs to stop respecting the umps so much. That pick off should have been challenged, it would have changed the complexion of the inning and the momentum. If I were Brach I would be pissed at Buck.

As Scott pointed out in the game thread, the blame is really with the O's replay coordinator, not Buck. The replay guy is supposed to be the one determining whether the play is worth reviewing, since Buck is out on the field.

I can't imagine why he decided it wasn't worth a challenge -- the slo-mo replay seemed pretty conclusive, and that late in the game, it's unlikely that you need to keep a challenge in your pocket for later.

[Camden_yardbird]

You assume Buck is challenging every time it's available. I feel like he's not utilizing that rule.

[24fps]

Maybe we should dress Joe up in a rubber Robby suit when he goes behind the plate and let him announce the pitch fx results, or better yet sing them. That would sure be entertaining. Or maybe let the booming voice of the HAL computer come over the PA system saying,"Sorry Joe, but you were mistaken, that was a strike".

I'm OK with the first part, the second part genuinely scares me. Imagine mechanical balls and strikes being called once some marketing "genius" took a pass at it. Called strike three? Yankee Statium SFX on steroids would just be a start.

[24fps]

Some of these umps been doing this for years. And they still have trouble figuring out wether a pitch was in "their personal" strike zone or not? Give me a break.

You know why that is? Because there isnt a league wide understanding of what an actual strike is.because they get to make their own.

And everyone always brings up the timing of the game "if they were allowed to argue at nauseam, it would add 6 hours to the game" yada yada yada...

If they replaced umps with computers and it was accurate there would be NO arguing to be done. And there would be NO unnecessary ejections. And the game would run SMOOTHER and FASTER.

I mean how can a player argue with a computer?

SMOOTHER and FASTER doesn't get me to the ballpark. Richer and more entertaining does. Human umpires are part of that richness. So is the arguing. So is the bile that comes up every time Jeter give the umpire "that look" when he's called out on a third strike right down the heart of the plate. Human judgement and the potential to be wrong is part of the fabric of the game.

Just so it doesn't get out of hand.

Most people would agree that strike zone consistency from umpire to umpire could be improved. So do I. I don't know too many people other than yourself and a few others here who maintain that the umpiring system is inherently so broken that it's beyond repair. The umpires are in a difficult place because technology poses a real threat to at least part of what they do. They're also perceived by many including myself to be too arrogant for their own good. IMO neither of those things, individually or taken together, is a sufficient basis for eliminating such a fundamental part of the game experience. Far worse would be to turn plate umpires into mere figureheads. That would be insulting and a disservice to a group of highly skilled professionals. Worse it would be an insult to the fan's intelligence.

If the umps don't get ahead of this and start using technology to improve and maintain their traditional skills, then people with views such as your own will ultimately win out. That would be a shame.