Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

I am really getting tired of having umpires unduly influence the outcome of games.

Case in point tonight was when Manny took a 3-0 pitch that was 9+ inches off the plate and was called a strike. Instead of having the bases loaded and nobody out, he ends up hitting into a double play.

It is ridiculous to tell batters/pitchers that they have to adjust to the umpire. A strike should be a strike regardless of who is calling it.

When the umpire expands the strike zone, it forces batters to start swinging at bad pitches rather than being called out on strikes.

We have the technology available to instantly determine whether or not a ball is in the strike zone. So why don't we use it?

You can talk 'spirit of the game' and 'tradition' all you want, but all you are doing is arguing that bad calls should remain a part of the game when we have the ability to remove them.

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

Yes. As long as the tech works.

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

Yes

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

No. Umpires should be held accountable and canned when they suck. That is the problem.

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

Challenge system (similar to tennis) ftw.

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

I thought the NFL and NBA already proved that using technology to reduce officiating error is pretty much universally appreciated?

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes

[/ QUOTE ]

I think just giving the umpire a vibrating strike caller would be fine, so he'd still look like he's calling them.

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Challenge system (similar to tennis) ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would be horrible, there are so many border line pitches in baseball that either every third pitch would be challenged or teams would be unable to challenge obviously incorrect calls due to limited challenges. Either keep the current system or go to an instant computerized system, but challenges are the worst of both worlds.

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

Was thinking about this exact issue tonight. We have the "K-Zone," etc., so obviously we have the technology to phase out home-plate umpires entirely. And I'm of the opinion that virtually every call in baseball can be called by an artificial source. We have the "cyclops" in tennis that could perform virtually the same function on the foul lines, and something can be done to judge force outs, including 1st base (base sensors, etc.).

But I would imagine it'll take years before we even begin this discussion for real.

Re: Should balls and strikes be called electronically?
 

the strike zone is such an imperfect science I don't think technology would ever really be able to take over.