DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Automated strike zone

. I like the human element and umpires being a part of the game, good or bad. Balls and strikes should be left to the ump, or it is a computer game.
I’m good with plays on the field being overturned when they weren’t the right calls, btw.

So who is going to call plays at the plate? Is an umpire going to get dressed in full gear to stand there like a dummy except for plays at the plate or possibly some foul ball calls up against the net?

Maybe it would work. Just seems like that would slow the game down and take away the time they have cut off the time it takes to play a game.

To me it is just part of the game. For the most part I think the umps do a good job. No doubt a few have shown to be inconsistent. I say use the technology to grade the umps and use that to see what sort of percentage they have over a season.

You are a baseball guy. You know that there is a 2 strike approach to hitting. You choke up a bit, shorten the swing a bit and be ready to hack if it is a borderline pitch. I think hitters and pitcher spend too much time moaning about things and not enough to adjust to things.

I am sure it will be tried, and least looked at in full detail.

I don't even think they will be able define a strike. From a right hander in the box, is it a strike if the outside edge of the ball shaves the inside corner or is it only a strike if inside edge of the ball shave the corner? That is a big difference for both the hitter and the pitcher. With that you are looking at a 3 inch difference. Almost 6 inches if you count both side of the plate.

You could say the same for balls at the lower end of the strike zone.

Short answer is: Yes, it's a strike. Any part of the ball that goes over any part of the plate (provided the ball is between the lowest level of the strike zone and the highest level of the strike zone - is a strike.

Now, I'm not a baseball official, but I am for softball, and I believe the def. of a strike is the same for both sports.

I want to see it in game time and how it plays out in use. I am too simple, I guess. This decision has to be predicated upon a couple simple concerns. One, what is a strike? Second, what is a strike zone? And, having answered those questions, implementing some technology that reliably calls balls and strikes, doing so fairly, correctly, and consistently. Simplify, simplify. Don't "call 'em as you see 'em" at the plate. Just call them. All players and coaches should embrace the fact that whatever is implemented after decisions are made, seemingly, will be called for both teams, for better and for worse. Nothing is reliably perfect, but this promises much less subjectivity. We don't need to endlessly blur and correct and second guess if we can reduce it to its most basic denominator. Fiddle too much, offer too many exceptions and too much subjectivity, there is a distinct possibility that you end up[ with something as crystal clear as what constitute a catch in the NFL today or pass interference. There will be plenty of opportunities for missed calls, wrong calls, and the like. We can still eject participants and find reasons to clear benches, but the business of batting, drawing walks, and striking out should be reliable. I favor it, at least to give it a whirl.

1988 - "The Strike Zone is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the top of the knees. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball."

1996 - The Strike Zone is expanded on the lower end, moving from the top of the knees to the bottom of the knees.

https://www.mlb.com/official-information/umpires/strike-zone

For the life of me I have no idea why any baseball fan would not want balls and strikes called on a more consistent and fair basis.