One Last Thing About Umpire Videos

It’s pretty rare that we’ll write about something two years after it happens. Baseball is a fickle mistress. Two years after Bryan LaHair was an All-Star, he was playing abroad. A year after Mets went to the World Series, they lost in the Wild Card game, and a year after that, they won 70 games. A lot can change in two years, is the point.

Nevertheless, I’m going to take you down memory lane. To May of 2016, to be precise. The setting is a game between the Mets and Dodgers. Chase Utley is the batter; Noah Syndergaard is the pitcher. And for added emphasis, there’s history here – Chase Utley, you will remember, famously broke Ruben Tejada’s leg during the 2015 National League Division Series.

The next time the Mets faced Utley, all hell broke loose.

Noah Syndergaard buzzed Utley with a 99 mph fastball and was promptly ejected. The entire Mets infield argued vigorously, but the most emphatic argument came from Terry Collins, who is not nearly as geriatric or mild-mannered as one might suppose from his visage. And, for reasons known only to the baseball gods, the recording of this argument somehow only just came out last week.

Now, the game itself played out in a fairly Mets-like manner: after watching Syndergaard’s fastball sail behind him, Chase Utley went on to hit not one, but two, homers and lead the Dodgers to a 9-1 drubbing. But you don’t care about that, really. No, what you care about is the part of the video where umpire Tom Hallion calms down an angry Mets infield, and then turns to deal with a literally hopping mad Terry Collins. The resulting profanity-laced discussion between Hallion and Collins is — and I say this with absolute certainty — the best thing to come out of the 2016 baseball season.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

Unbelievably, the most interesting part of the story might not actually be the video itself, but what happened after it went viral. Within hours, MLB began pulling it off the internet with copyright claims. The Associated Press, via ESPN, explains why:

“We made a commitment to the umpires that if they would wear microphones, certain types of interactions that we all know go on the field would not be aired publicly,” [MLB Commissioner Rob] Manfred said Thursday after the owners meetings ended. “We promised them that. It’s in the collective bargaining agreement. We had no choice in a situation like that than to do everything possible to live up to our agreement. It is Labor Relations 101. To not do that is the kind of breach of trust that puts you in a bad spot over the long haul,” he said.

Manfred is referring to the Collective Bargaining Agreement between MLB and umpires, which is not the same as the CBA between MLB and players. The umpires are part of a union called the World Umpires Association, which represents them in labor negotiations with MLB. Jason Foster of MSN passes along just what those regulations about umpire audio say:

“Those guidelines state that all audio from umpire microphones that are not aired during the telecast are to be deleted immediately after the game,” MLB said in statement to SN on Thursday, adding that a review is underway to determine how the Collins audio was leaked.

And relations between MLB and the WUA generally aren’t too cozy. Litigation, for instance, is far more common in this relationship than it is between MLB and players, and last year WUA members formally protested verbal attacks on umpires by players and coaches by wearing white wristbands. So it makes some sense, then, that Manfred and MLB would want to avoid an unnecessary kerfuffle in the widespread distribution of this video.

Which leads to another question, however: if umpire audio really is supposed to be deleted immediately after a game, then why was this particular item available to be leaked in the first place? In light of the arrangement between the umpires and the league, it should probably have never have existed — and certainly not more than two full years later. If the WUA wanted to take an action for breach of the CBA, then the legal basis for doing so — that is, the breach of the CBA itself — was complete as soon as that game ended and the video wasn’t deleted. That it achieved widespread distribution merely goes to damages, and MLB’s attempts to stop its spread go to mitigation rather than anything else.

And yet, on the other hand, it’s not at all clear that this is something the WUA should want quashed. After all, Hallion — profanity aside — did a fairly good job of keeping the lid on a potentially explosive situation, and was, at least in my opinion, professional in doing it. The video shows Hallion representing the WUA well. At the same time, it also shows the sort of verbal attacks which the WUA was protesting last year, and really makes you understand more just how hard an umpire’s job really can be.

And then, of course, there’s one final matter — namely, whether other examples of such audio exist. It’s possible that the Collins-Haillon encounter is an isolated incident. It almost might not be, though. It wouldn’t be surprising if this were a question the WUA is attempting to answer. After all, the next video may not be so benign, for anyone involved.





Sheryl Ring is a litigation attorney and General Counsel at Open Communities, a non-profit legal aid agency in the Chicago suburbs. You can reach her on twitter at @Ring_Sheryl. The opinions expressed here are solely the author's. This post is intended for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice.

93 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
josephd10
8 years ago

His butt was in the jackpot

Yirmiyahu
8 years ago
Reply to  josephd10

Is that an expression? I understand from context what he means, but I’ve never heard that before.

harryhippie
8 years ago
Reply to  Yirmiyahu

The term “jackpot” was used several times in No Country For Old Men.
“You’re in the jackpot, and I’m trying to get you out of it.” I’ve never seen the movie or read the book, though.

ballz1220
8 years ago

We mic up players and coaches. We force them to be accountable to the media. Not sure why umpires get a pass. Nice article Sheryl.

Gavin
8 years ago
Reply to  ballz1220

…because they negotiated for and won the privilege to not be heard.

schpydahMember since 2017
8 years ago
Reply to  Gavin

So as to keep their asses out of the jackpot.

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  Gavin

It does make me wonder what kind of leverage they had with the MLB that they could win such a concession in their CBA.

Gavin
8 years ago
Reply to  v2micca

I think it is in MLB’s interest to keep the umps as faceless and mysterious as possible.

Maggie25
8 years ago
Reply to  Gavin

Yeah I honestly don’t imagine it was a huge sticking point for MLB. There’s probably a lot of stuff that people say on the field they probably don’t really want to be public.

bly
8 years ago
Reply to  Gavin

Here too robo umps would help.

francis_soyer
8 years ago
Reply to  Gavin

“Hilarious”

– Joe West

ballz1220
8 years ago
Reply to  Gavin

Seeing as they can be easily replaced by either technology or by minor league umps who are dying to get to the big leagues MLB should break the union and provide for more accountability.

CC AFCMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  ballz1220

I believe the Pinkertons may have an opening for you

tramps like us
8 years ago
Reply to  ballz1220

if there’s a site where we can hear players making candid, in-the-moment comments on the field, I’m unaware of it.

tb.25
8 years ago

It may just be me, but I feel like the World Umpire’s Association is a confused group. They protest verbal abuse while continually run horrific umpires out there, drawing abuse.

Rather than strain the MLB-WUA relationship, they should try to be peaceful and content – it’ll be extremely easy to replace them with robots once the technology is ready.

Sleepy
8 years ago
Reply to  tb.25

I (and anyone else with a television) can do the vast majority of an umpire’s job with 99% accuracy from my couch. The technology exists now.

Maggie25
8 years ago
Reply to  tb.25

I’m not going to go around arguing that umpires don’t screw up big sometimes, but in the average game the worst an umpire does is miss a few strike/ball calls. I think we should cool it with the “it’s easy to be an umpire” talk and also the “it’s going to be easy to replace umpires” talk. They do a tough job and most of them do it well.

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

I have never argued “it’s easy to be an umpire”. Quite the contrary, I have long argued because of the inherent difficulty of the tasks is should have be relegated to an automated process that could complete it with a much higher level of accuracy and consistency.

kenai kings
8 years ago
Reply to  v2micca

“a much higher level of”… boring, faceless and unaccountable HAL’s. Not my idea of what any sport is intended to be.

dl80Member since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

The problem is that there are several terrible ones (West, Hernandez, Bucknor).

Baron Samedi
8 years ago

cocksuckers

Ade
8 years ago
Reply to  Baron Samedi

not that there’s anything wrong with that!

tramps like us
8 years ago
Reply to  Ade

Seinfield reference…nice!

CubsMLOrNah
8 years ago
Reply to  Baron Samedi

And frankly, sports fans, he used a word that’s a no-no with umpires.

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
8 years ago

The video, which is of course great, makes the umps look really, really good — professional, trying to defuse the situation at every opportunity. So it is a little strange that MLB attacked it so aggressively with the takedowns. But this is a genie-back-in-the-bottle situation and with any luck they’ll learn that you just can’t allow recordings of this stuff to be kept if you don’t want it out there. I assume the TV production staff are being investigated, internally and very quietly in a way we’ll never hear about, but that’s the part of this story I’d really like to know more about. Is someone losing their job over this? Are TV production workflows being reviewed and changed to prevent other recordings from being made? If not, expect it to happen again.

JimMember since 2016
8 years ago

Yes, very professional.

HappyFunBallMember since 2019
8 years ago

This one made the guy look good. I’m quite sure there are cases where the ump was putting on a show, and if one of THEM leaks out then things would look … less good.

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
8 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

I’m sure of that too, and really we’re both just repeating the article here, but it’s weird to see them making a fuss about this, which is pretty much just nice clean fun and a nifty look behind the scenes.

Curtis Cook
8 years ago

There’s a principle involved. Principled people — and organizations — want the rules to be followed whether doing so is in their best interests in any specific case.

Maggie25
8 years ago

I commented on the wrong thing and I don’t know how to delete my comment so now I’m editing it to say nothing at all.

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

Better than most of the replies I get!

jwa05001
8 years ago

I didn’t realize there was so much umpire hate.

They get balls and strikes right 85% of the time:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.beyondtheboxscore.com/platform/amp/2014/1/27/5341676/how-well-do-umpires-call-balls-and-strikes

Imagine if somebody busted your balls at your job the 15% of the time you weren’t perfect. Oh and I doubt anything is flying at you 90 mph at your office.

Paul22
8 years ago
Reply to  jwa05001

15% failure rate in most professions gets you fired. In war it gets you killed

HoratioSky
8 years ago
Reply to  Paul22

Truth. If they were 85% accurate on safe/out calls at 1st base people would be up in arms. Laser strike zones are overdue. Leave the umps behind the plate to communicate with the batter where exactly the ball missed. Plus — and this is important to remind people of the average human thought process — you would actually see people like Machado and Justin Upton arguing with the umpires about “BS” calls even when the umpires have no say in the matter, which would be hilarious and entertaining to fans.

Maggie25
8 years ago
Reply to  Paul22

As a batter failing 60% of the time can get you millions of dollars.

WerthlessMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  jwa05001

If my job was at risk of being automated by a machine that can be 100% accurate, and I am wrong 15% of the time, I’d be polishing my resume.

Maggie25
8 years ago
Reply to  Werthless

I don’t think a machine that calls balls and strikes perfectly exists right now.

francis_soyer
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

I don’t think an umpire that calls balls and strikes better than a machine exists right now.

dl80Member since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

I’m quite sure there is one that can do better than 85% though.

kenai kings
8 years ago
Reply to  Werthless

Those of you who think robot umps would get it right 100% of the time are living some fantasy. How often do you hear, “our computers are down.”?

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  jwa05001

I don’t have to imagine. I’m a network engineer. Any time we are wrong we spend a week minimum being raked over the coals in incident review board meetings. I’ve had friends and colleagues fired over a single typo in 200+ lines of config text.

Jetsy Extrano
8 years ago
Reply to  v2micca

Wow that’s bad. If an engineer decided to blow past a reliable presubmit check, sure, then they screwed up. If the check was unreliable or non-existent, then somebody bigger screwed up.

“Human error” is almost never a good attribution in technical systems. That’s just a way of not fixing your process that let the human error go through. Mistakes happen, and firing people just gets you new mistake makers.

end rant

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  jwa05001

Additionally, I find that 85% number less than impressive as it includes all the easy calls. I believe another study found that when you eliminate these easy calls, (balls in the dirt, center cut strikes, ect.) and look only at calls made along the edges of the strike zone, their accuracy drops below 60%.

11235813
8 years ago
Reply to  v2micca

As you take the infinitesimal limit to the strike zone boundary, do you get 50%?

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  11235813

That would be close to ideal. Sadly I don’t have those numbers.

tung_twista
8 years ago
Reply to  jwa05001

If umpires called everything a ball, they’d be correct 68% of the time.
In light of that, that 85% number doesn’t look that good, does it?

E
8 years ago
Reply to  tung_twista

It’s a tough job. Mike Trout doesn’t bat .850

Curtis Cook
8 years ago
Reply to  E

Mike Trout doesn’t call balls and strikes. His job is much more difficult.

francis_soyer
8 years ago
Reply to  tung_twista

[ Insert Tyler Chatwood joke here ]

Maggie25
8 years ago
Reply to  jwa05001

It’s amazing how many people here at Fangraphs don’t make mistakes.

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

How are the foibles, professional or personal, of the fangraphs community any sort of a justification for the umpire’s performance?

bly
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

I make mistakes, but 1) I don’t get paid $500,000/year, 2) I don’t have a hissy fit when someone gets upset at me for making mistakes, 3) I’m willing to admit I’m wrong when shown evidence that I made mistakes, and 4) I do everything I can to automate any process where I can make a mistake to prevent them in the future.

Free Clay Zavada
8 years ago
Reply to  jwa05001

You haven’t heard of Six Sigma, have you?

kenai kings
8 years ago

Nor have I… care to expound?

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
8 years ago
Reply to  jwa05001

That post finds that umpires and PitchF/X disagreed 15% of the time. But there is absolutely no reason to believe that PitchF/X is 100% accurate about the top and bottom edges of the strike zone. I repeat this a lot when the subject of strike-zone automation comes up but it’s still true — the top and bottom of the rulebook strike zone vary not just per batter, but depending on the batter’s specific stance as the pitch crosses the plate on a per-pitch basis, and so far as I know the current technology takes no account of that at all.

bly
8 years ago

Yes, but we also know umps don’t move the zone even per batter.

bly
8 years ago
Reply to  bly

See baseball prospectus, spinning yarns on the strike zone (sorry, phone won’t let me link). Basically, the zone varies by less than an inch between players.

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
8 years ago
Reply to  bly

I’d appreciate a link if you can find one. I googled the article you seemed to be talking about ( https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/12965/spinning-yarn-the-real-strike-zone/ ) and clicked on all the links and I can’t find anything that even remotely seems to bear out your claim. On the contrary, the majority of the cited research (e.g. https://www.fangraphs.com/tht/strike-zone-fact-vs-fiction/ ) uses a “standardized” single zone without even attempting to adjust for batter variation.

bly
8 years ago

Agreed, a unmoving strike zone probably makes the most sense and probably fits the data best without overfitting. Here’s the article. https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/14098/spinning-yarn-the-real-strike-zone-part-2/ Here’s the quote, “Most batters’ strike zone boundaries are within an inch of 41 inches (3.42 feet) high at the top and within an inch of 21 inches (1.75 feet) high at the bottom.”

going_bonkers
8 years ago

The umpire came out looking really good in this video. It is too bad for baseball it is no longer public. It seemed like this ump acted the way an Umpire should act.

420Smash
8 years ago
Reply to  going_bonkers

I just downloaded it from YouTube. 22.2 MB two minutes long.

YouTube search: LAD/NYM: 1B umpire Tom Hallion mic’d up as Thor & manager TC ejected

Maggie25
8 years ago

I never thought I’d be saying this, but I really am not enjoying how fine many people here seem to feel saying that umpires aren’t perfect and therefore should lose their jobs to machines.

Captain Tenneal
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

I don’t think it’s a malicious “you’re bad so you don’t deserve to have a job” feeling so much as it is a “hey we really really need this to be done right so if you can’t do that then sorry but you gotta go”

EasyenoughMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

I’d like for Umps to get some assistive technology so their accuracy rates go up dramatically. I don’t think “Lose their job” is really on the table despite some here saying they want to see it.

fjtorres
8 years ago
Reply to  Easyenough

That much is doable today with a heads up display, say a monocle.
Give them a strike zone overlay like the broadcasts use.
Still a judgment call but they could be more consistent which would go a long way to reduce ball-strike arguments. Especially by pitchers.

EasyenoughMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  fjtorres

I was thinking more like a tone played in an earpiece that indicates a strike – and everything else is a ball. Super simple, invisible, and already used for 100 mph balls in tennis (in 2d, 3d is harder, of course).

kenai kings
8 years ago
Reply to  fjtorres

What most of those interested in a robo ump fail to realize is the strike zone is not on a simple plain. Home plate lies flat on the ground so the strike zone has depth along with width and height. I recognize the difficulty of getting the calls right, but am not confident that on balance robo umps will improve the game.

dl80Member since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  kenai kings

Any pitch that touches any part of the 3d zone should be a strike. Cameras could absolutely do that. If the official strike zone then needs to be changed slightly because of unintended consequences (too many strikes on pitches at the very edge?), so be it.

Free Clay Zavada
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

If a robot did my job significantly better than me I’d be fine with losing it.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
8 years ago

You are either lying or are in fact a robot.

Curtis Cook
8 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Or maybe he has a job like mine. There’s really no reason for my job to exist, and if my Dad could find a robot to do it, I’d gladly retire.

Free Clay Zavada
8 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Nope. How could anyone feel worthy of being paid for something that a machine could do better? You wouldn’t be making a difference.

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

I will also shed no tears when automated vehicles render taxi cab drivers obsolete.

fjtorres
8 years ago
Reply to  v2micca

How about long distance truckers? That will happen first. Mostly because there is a shortage.

CubsMLOrNah
8 years ago
Reply to  fjtorres

The shortage is largely due to the fact that Trucker pay has not kept up with inflation since the 1980’s due to the deregulation of the trucking industry.

In 1980, the average trucker earned $111,000 per year when adjusted for inflation. Today, they make just $44,000.

The deregulation bumped the economy quite a bit, but the trucking profession has never recovered.

francis_soyer
8 years ago
Reply to  CubsMLOrNah

“In 1980, the average trucker earned $111,000 per year when adjusted for inflation.”

Yet they whined like crazy, blamed Carter for it, and cheered when Reagan came around to save them.

fjtorres
8 years ago
Reply to  CubsMLOrNah

It is also a tough job.
Long runs and seasonally dangerous.
And it’s one that automation can improve, especially on late night runs on the interstates. Particularly in bad weather.
Tests are underway by several companies.
I expect they’ll go with a drone approach where remotely located drivers will monitor a bunch of convoys, ready to take over in case of emergency.

raws
8 years ago
Reply to  fjtorres

#truckgraphs

dl80Member since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  fjtorres

Thank God. I won’t miss truckers going 90 down a hill and 50 up it, or passing another truck by going .05 MPH faster on a two lane highway.

tb.25
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

First, nobody on this thread is saying that, despite your multiple comments suggesting it.

Second, why would they be fired? Can an automated strike zone determine out or safe, or a balk, or even analyze a lineup card?

The goal of calling balls and strikes is to be as perfect as you can. If a machine does it better, please use it. Umpires won’t lose their jobs – they do too much. But this whole ‘you aren’t perfect so we need to fire you for a machine’ idea you keep ‘seeing’ doesn’t exist on this thread and, frankly, even in real life, if a machine can do it better, probably should let it do it.

Maggie25
8 years ago
Reply to  tb.25

You’re right that I overgeneralized. But I don’t agree that there is no sentiment in this thread at all that umpires should just be replaced. That idea really bothers me, so I overreacted as if that’s what most people were saying.

CubsMLOrNah
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

I would rather have 85% accuracy than 100% accuracy if it means putting a robot behind the plate. Umpires play a part in making the game entertaining.

francis_soyer
8 years ago
Reply to  CubsMLOrNah

Let’s get rid of the foul lines and get more umps in the outfield – that’ll REALLY be entertaining.

francis_soyer
8 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

They don’t need to lose their jobs, just some of their responsibilities.

Shattenjager
8 years ago

I misread the headline as “One Last Thing About Vampire Videos” and clicked on it thinking, “What could that possibly mean?!” When the page loaded, I realized my mistake, but for a second I thought you had somehow written about vampires on Fangraphs, which would be a pretty impressive connection to make.

dl80Member since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Shattenjager

Vlad “The Impaler” Guerrero Jr. (Bring back Notgraphs)

#KeepNotGraphs
8 years ago
Reply to  Shattenjager

This happens all the time to people thinking this is FangGraphs.

francis_soyer
8 years ago

I’m going a bit off topic here but whatever:

Can the MLB get rid of lines drawn on walls determining home runs.

Billions are put into these parks and they can’t build ones where a wall determines a home run ?

Curtis Cook
8 years ago
Reply to  francis_soyer

Nice. That’s a pet peeve of mine.

WoundedSprinterMember since 2018
8 years ago

Thank you once again, as always, Sheryl.

Magician_531
8 years ago

Am I the only one who thinks that this doesn’t portray umpires in a good light? It seems like he was, at worst, making the claim that his decision was based on the consequences that he would receive and not based on what he actually thought was the right call. At worst, he was just saying that to calm the Mets down, but the end result was to blame the leagues instead of defend his decision.

eris
8 years ago
Reply to  Magician_531

I think he was blaming the league for the lack of consequences for Utley and the Dodgers. I think that is fair. If the league wanted to end this behavior the consequences for intentionally injuring or trying to injure an opponent would be immediate and severe. Implementing this would be difficult because the suspension process takes weeks. For example, think of the Anthony Rizzo discussion on this site several weeks ago, the league said that the umpires had the call wrong but there were no consequences for Rizzo.

RonnieDobbs
8 years ago

The day that robo umps are deployed we will all realize that we simply trade one problem for another. There was a time when everyone thought instant replay was such a great idea, it took a few years to realize why it wasn’t (slide rules, pace-of-play, etc). Are calls really better now? Every overturned blunder is probably offset by a cooky overslide… not no mention that SBs just kind of evaporated as a result. Is that really better? Anyone who does any research will find that pitch tracking has issues – it won’t be perfect. At that point you are just trading one problem for another – at least we have scapegoats in the current system and lets be honest. we love those. Change isn’t always for the best… but we live in a society addicted to it. My definition of an addiction is when it becomes compulsive and starts to destroy the things around itself… sounds about right to me.