MLB To Test Expanded Replay Next Week
Major League Baseball owners have agreed to test two different advanced replay systems live during games starting next week, and if they prove accurate they could precede an overhaul of the system for the 2013 season, sources told Yahoo! Sports.
MLB will analyze a radar-based system and a camera-based system, both similar to the one used in tennis for down-the-line fair-or-foul calls. Yankee Stadium and Citi Field will be the guinea-pig parks for the systems, which have been installed recently.
The use of the systems will be strictly in the background and for analysis. Because the number of questionable plays during games is likely to be limited, MLB plans to do extra testing on non-game days. Before implementing the technology in its 30 ballparks, the league wants to ensure its accuracy is up to standard.
As Jeff Passan notes in the article, this is essentially an accuracy gauge test, and the system has to show MLB officials that it can provide a definitive improvement on things like fair/foul calls. The fact that they’re testing it does not mean that they’re going to decide to use it, or that it could be implemented quickly, or that Bud Selig is aware that a lot of fans of his sport are in favor of expanded replay.
However, trying it out is better than continuing to proclaim that there aren’t enough people writing letters decrying the lack of technology used to help umpires get as many calls correct as possible. At least this gives us some hope that the test may go well, that MLB officials may see the value in expanded replay, and that we may be headed towards a day when the officials on the field have access to the same (or better!) information that everyone watching on TV has.
It’s a small step, but it’s a step in the right direction.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
YAY!
Didn’t ol’ Bud say “no one” was interested in replay recently?
He was right. He was talking about his Japanese mail man No One (pronounced ‘no’ oh-neigh), who liked the idea so much he stole all of the fan-mail concerned with the issue.
Jeff Passan seems to be getting the scoop on quite a bit in the past few weeks. Seeing his name in a lot of places.
I guess Dustin Pedroia is in charge of installing the replay systems.
What is this? How is everyone else also reading this letter sent to me? And why didn’t it come in the mail?
I’m still in favor of getting rid of the umps altogether. Players argue with them, as do managers, and I actually think the games will go faster. For all the analysis on this site, how well would the Cubs be doing if they had gotten good calls all season?
Lots of teams get bad calls, meaning, the standings are not even accurate. The umps decide everything and really don’t do a great job in the context of the technology out there.
They get far more right than they get wrong.
Right… the Cubs are terrible because of those damn umpires. It has nothing to do with that AAA lineup they put out there.
Understatement of the year Kenny…haha
I am a Cubs fan in Iowa and couldn’t agree more. I miss watching my Iowa Cubs since they are in Wrigley now
I ran the numbers through my Ump Neutralizer 5000 and it turns out that if the Cubs had gotten good calls all season, they would be 78-38 at this point.
Did you remember to have the opponent for that simulation set to something other than the Cubs AA (and lower) teams?
I hear that if the umps were replaced, all 30 teams would get a bump in the standings.
Except the Yankees!
I’m sorry, instead of “good” calls, I meant “correct” calls?
I think the other commenters are saying that the Cubs aren’t disproportionately affected by bad umpires.
If I give you a dollar, will you buy a book on rational thinking?
that sounds rational
That seems a lot of work when we could just replace people with robots .
Thinking about more adaptations way into the future, I’d like to know more about how PitchFX recognizes the difference between strike zones for various hitter sizes and shapes. For instance, how well is it at adjusting between a Jose Altuve (5’5″) and Justin Maxwell (6’5″)? I always wonder about that when I’m looking at zone numbers and charts.
I think it measures height of the knee at the start of the AB (while the batter is in his stance). I’m not sure what they use as a second reference point. And then this is adjusted vs average reference points.
Not sure how the system handles a player whose swing may alter his strike zone more/less than the average hitter (bending or striding more vs hitting more upright)
Don’t have a good link, and I can’t remember where I saw this, so take with a grain of salt.
“The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter’s stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.” So I assume stride differences and such don’t affect it?
Wait, where are we gonna store all that leftover “human element”? In a warehouse somewhere?
We can keep it next the barrels marked “team chemistry”.
Should have read “next to the barrels”.
Get your hands off my barrells!
Heh. ‘Team chemistry.’ Like they had in Miami, or like the have in Washington? ‘Cause, just sayin’, those teams looked pretty equal on paper at the start of the year. But they surely weren’t equal on the field.
“Good team chemistry” is probably unmeasurable. But I think “bad team chemistry” at least has observable effects. Of course, sometimes bad team chemistry is, itself, an effect of being bad already. But I think even good teams, i.e., teams composed of individually talented players, can play poorly together because they just don’t get along, especially if they hit a period of adversity in the season.
Sometimes bad chemistry causes you to trade Kevin Youkilis for Brent Lillibridge. That happened, right?
We have top men working on it right now.
Top… Men.
MLB should research how much time is wasted arguing with umps.
An ump blows a call, it instantly adds 4-5 min to the length of the game.
If you’re going to spend that time, might as well get the call correct.
4-5 minutes?
More like 15-30 seconds.
Going to expanded replay, however, WOULD add at least a couple of minutes to the game every time there’s a dispute.
disagree. when watching on tv, they use replays to show definitively that the play was one way or the other in the time between one pitch and the next. it takes under a minute, and the pitcher is often still getting his signs for the next pitch when they come back to real time after showing two or three replays from different angles in slowmo.
it takes Charlie Manuel 15-30 seconds to adjust his waistband before he rumbles out of the dugout.
While it doesn’t happen every game, a truly blown call will get the manager out of the dugout, and unless he’s shot from a sniper at first step on the field, those arguments aren’t less than a min long.
It takes 15-30 seconds just for the manager to get out to where the umpire is on the field. I’m referring to calls that are clearly blown to the extent that the a manager-umpire confrontation takes place. Those situations never take less than a minute to conclude, and usually last much longer than that.
Of course, those plays don’t make up most or even necessarily a majority of all plays that could be subject to review.
Almost all the time when there’s an argument the manager jogs out to the umpire. Some of these guys are out of shape, but it doesn’t take any of them 30 seconds to make it the 50 feet to where the umpire is standing. Now, SOMETIMES the argument is extended, but for the most part the discussion goes
“Are you kidding me, his foot was clearly on the bag!’
“His foot left the bag before the ball got there, Frank”
“What? Why don’t you get some help?”
“I don’t need to. I saw the play perfectly well.”
“Christ! You’re awful…. Have I been out here thirty seconds yet? OK, I’m making a pitching change”
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on how much time is wasted during umpire/manager arguments. But, I don’t care if it did add time. I want the calls right, therefore I’m for much more expanded replay. I’m a Phillies fan and I remember in 2005 they lost a game in extra innings that went to extra innings because the first base umpire blew what would have been a game-ending double play. The Phillies missed the playoffs by one game that year.
By the way, managers arguing with umps will continue with or without replay. And, besides, they are often just as entertaining as the game itself!
With a proper instant replay setup, there will be no reason to argue for any length. The “argument” would just be:
Manager: “I think you got the call wrong.”
Ump: “Nope, Steve reviewed it up in the booth on your way out here and just said I got it right.”
Manager: *walks back to dugout*
This all seems like a waste. I’ve spent a lot of time umpiring, and I can tell you that fair/foul calls are easy to make. The umps get them right about, oh, 99.99997% of the time.
Yeah, not that I’ve *never* seen this blown in MLB, but there are way, way more screwups involving where the ball is when it passes the bag than there are about where it lands down the line. And way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way more screwups on forces and tags than all fair/fouls combined.
You seem like a pretty legitimate source
They’ll have the system in place just in time for us to play the Yankees in the playoffs, where mistakes are never made on fair/foul calls.
Brilliant. When you can correct far more errors by simply looking at already-existing camera feeds on black and white plays (forces, tags, fair/foul, etc), it’s hard to imagine a more expensive and dumber replay idea than installing a radar system to determine if a ball landed to the left or right of a line painted by some person trying to walk straight while pushing a machine. Maybe if they installed aquariums under the foul poles too so the whole thing could be calibrated by sharks with frickin laser beams attached to their heads.
I think MLB can afford it. Although, I prefer your Laserbeam Sharks.
They will be piloting that in Miami.
I’d take the sharks with laser beams attached to their heads determining fair/foul, even if they were completely inaccurate, just for the hilarity of it.
Really though, all these systems they’re paying boatloads to put in place, all they really need is to hire an extra ump for each crew, which would make umps happy, to rotate out up in a special booth with all the camera feeds (and maybe a technical assistant to help out), then mic that ump in with the umps on the field.
By the time the manager would get out to argue any call, on the vast majority of the plays, the ump in the booth will already have the correct call and can relay it to the ump on the field. Why do they keep making this so complicated (and slow in the case of HR calls)?
Further, the ump in the booth could even give feedback to the ump calling balls/strikes during the game. If the ump’s showing signs of consistently calling certain balls strikes, the ump in the booth can let them know to tighten up the strike zone in certain regions or the like. Given the umps are graded on things like this and they genuinely do want to call a good game I’m sure, I’m sure they’d appreciate the in-game feedback.
Yeah, I can sure see umpires doing that. Imagine good ole Cowboy Joe West behind home plate taking suggestions on his pitch calling in the middle of a nice hot summer afternoon with the Yankees and Redsox.. I am sure he will be very gracious and calm about it. Heck, why not have the managers come out and help out with his pitch calling too !
personally, i am all for using all available technology to get every call correct, whether it be HRs, fair/foul, or balls/strikes. i understand the old-fashioned charm in having umpires around (and they should always be around, regardless of technology, to help facilitate the game and enforce rules), but when it comes down to it, i believe that every call should be correct.
some umpires have different strike zones than others. is that really fair to pitchers and batters? a strike is a strike, and a ball is a ball, regardless of the situation. take some recent no-hitters/perfect games into consideration: there have been some questionable calls by umps in later innings (re: balls/strikes) in favor of the pitcher because of the circumstance. that’s just not fair. again, every pitch should be accurately called, regardless of the situation. i would be totally okay with robots of some sort calling balls and strikes to ensure every thing was called accurately.
i would also be okay with some sort of challenge system, like there is in tennis. if it’s a crucial situation, and an umpire calls a ball a strike (or vice-versa), a manager could challenge the call and then the ump pulls up pitch/fx or whatever to determine whether or not he was correct or not, and then adjust the call accordingly. it might slow the game down a bit, but if umpires would enforce the timing rule between pitches (as in the rulebook!) games would go more quickly anyway.
The day baseball finally dies is coming soon!