Robo Umps! (MLB)

Sean98

11:16a, 6/5/25

About. Damn. Time. ...this a day after an MLB ump rang up a guy on a pitch almost 7" off the plate. I'm not so sure that I love the limit of two challenges per game, but as long as they keep them as long as they're correct then it's probably the right fix to begin with.

Quote:
Manfred will propose ABS for 2026

In big news that is not at all surprising, commissioner Rob Manfred said yesterday he does plan to make a proposal to MLB's competition committee to introduce the automated ball/strike system (ABS) into regular-season games next year.
A quick catch-up on how it worked during spring training this year: Umpires still called pitches, but each team started with two challenges, which could be called by the pitcher, catcher or batter only. If the challenge was successful, the challenging team would retain that challenge.

There could be some tweaks before next year, but tweaks might be all the anti-ABS folks will get. As Drellich reports: "The league office has enough votes on the 11-person committee which is also made up of player representatives and one umpire to push through what it wants."

In short, you #RobotUmpsNow people are about to get your wish.

If it helps, the challenges really don't add much delay to the game. Rather than going full huddle-up-and-headsets about it, the ABS technology comes to the home plate umpire via earpiece. It's a delay of a few seconds at most, and the most egregious calls will be overturned.

dabo man

11:19a, 6/5/25

In reply to Sean98

They've had it in MiLB for a while. I saw it used last night in a AAA game.

But the last I heard, it still didn't work all that well.

Farmer_J

11:26a, 6/5/25

I love it. Can't tell you how many games i've seen ruined over bad balls and strikes.

I don't see why they can't have a team reviewing and give results within under a minute. Have an umpire in the booth with a video guy who can be appealed to.

HJack20

11:30a, 6/5/25

If the technology exists to instantly get the call right and we're allowing challenges, why not just have every pitch be automatically called by the computer?

MaroonStain

11:39a, 6/5/25

In reply to HJack20

HJack20 said:
If the technology exists to instantly get the call right and we're allowing challenges, why not just have every pitch be automatically called by the computer?

It's baseball. Someone will throw sissy either way

RED AG 98

11:52a, 6/5/25

Great first start. I hope the limit of 2 is greatly expanded over time but I get why it's starting here (umps, unions, etc.)

Relative to college ball, I have a really hard time seeing this mandated across all 300 D1 baseball schools. The money already isn't there now, and that's even before the House settlement for revenue sharing and the greatly increased scholarship limit.

I'd like to see the SEC lead the way here. I really wish they'd make it a priority to get this done for 2026 as well, but I just don't know feasible that is at this point. Make that the stretch / trial goal if you must, with full implementation in 2027. Just get it done.

RED AG 98

11:52a, 6/5/25

In reply to HJack20

HJack20 said:
If the technology exists to instantly get the call right and we're allowing challenges, why not just have every pitch be automatically called by the computer?

Umps. Unions. Hurt feelings.

Aston 91

12:07p, 6/5/25

Sounds like a good first step. How do they establish the upper and lower limit of the strike zone for each batter? I can see how inside/outside would be easy to do since the plate is fixed - but not sure how they set the vertical parameters considering the different heights of the batters.

RED AG 98

12:18p, 6/5/25

In reply to Aston 91

Aston 91 said:
Sounds like a good first step. How do they establish the upper and lower limit of the strike zone for each batter? I can see how inside/outside would be easy to do since the plate is fixed - but not sure how they set the vertical parameters considering the different heights of the batters.

ABS in the MiLB and MLB adjusts the zone per batter based on height.

TrackMan at the college level currently does not.

VegasAg86

12:58p, 6/5/25

In reply to dabo man

dabo man said:
They've had it in MiLB for a while. I saw it used last night in a AAA game.

But the last I heard, it still didn't work all that well.

They use it at the Aviators games and it seems to work very well, to me.

MiLB lets managers challenge, too.

dabo man

1:20p, 6/5/25

In reply to VegasAg86

Quote:
They use it at the Aviators games and it seems to work very well, to me.

MiLB lets managers challenge, too.

At some point not too many years ago, there was a review done of balls/strikes where the robo ump overruled the MiLB ump. The robo umps were actually less accurate than a human.

If they have the technology mastered, I have no need for human beings to be calling balls and strikes. Let the machine do it.

trouble

1:25p, 6/5/25

In reply to Sean98

So does it scream in his ear "WRONG, DUMBASS!"?

ensign_beedrill

1:46p, 6/5/25

In reply to trouble

I think we could get a recording of you to play for them.

RikkiTikkaTagem

1:49p, 6/5/25

I don't know what I think about this. I hate seeing games get taken over by bad umpiring but I think the competitive balance between batting and pitching is about to be changed drastically by the this. I feel like the variability in the zone due to human judging probably favors the pitcher overall.

I believe this because college and professional hitters have seen so many pitches that they are usually pretty accurate with their assessment of its a ball or strike. The edge of the zone is where it gets confusing for a batter and that variability in what a strike zone is at the edges is what gives batters the most question about whether or not to swing at a pitch. It leads to taking strikes and swinging at bad pitches.

I think that if batters start having the same strike zone all the time from college/minors and pros, we're going to start seeing the effects of this be a big net positive for the batters.

I think in college we'll see people with batting averages over 500 and some pros will have batting averages routinely in the 400s. Once you've established exactly what a ball and strike are, you're going to see hitters really take advantage of this. Just my very uneducated guess though.

Sterling82

1:50p, 6/5/25

In reply to trouble

trouble said:
So does it scream in his ear "WRONG, DUMBASS!"?

That's our job. I would guess 2 challenges wouldn't scratch the surface in the college game.

trouble

1:55p, 6/5/25

In reply to ensign_beedrill

I'd even be willing to personalize them.

THAT'S STRIKE 2, JEFFERY.

GET YOUR HAIR OUT OF YOUR EYES, MORRIS. THAT'S A BALL.

NOT EVEN CLOSE, JJ.

AgRyan04

2:16p, 6/5/25

Good first step

No need for the challenge, just call all pitches with it

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

ensign_beedrill

2:37p, 6/5/25

I don't like the idea of robot umpires but there is the one thing that will slide me into the "in favor" camp:

If they are cute little robots with digital screens that show an emoticon-like face with messages like "ball" or "strike." I am a sucker for a cute robot. Like Roomba.

Agsncws

2:51p, 6/5/25

In reply to dabo man

dabo man said:
Quote:
They use it at the Aviators games and it seems to work very well, to me.

MiLB lets managers challenge, too.
At some point not too many years ago, there was a review done of balls/strikes where the robo ump overruled the MiLB ump. The robo umps were actually less accurate than a human.

If they have the technology mastered, I have no need for human beings to be calling balls and strikes. Let the machine do it.

Im sure Im missing something, but if they were able to determine the accuracy of the robo and human umps......couldnt they use the same to call balls and strikes? It seems extremely unlikely there was a 2nd ump out there verifying accuracy....and if there was, who determines the 2nd ump is correct?

Anyway, Im extremely biased as someone who watches a lot of tennis and has seen the need for linespeople disappear within a few years. The lines are fixed, unlike batter's heights, but they have it down to fractions of an inch and reviewed within seconds. Its a no-brainer.

IslanderAg04

3:09p, 6/5/25

Who are all the over bearing parents supposed to yell at?

Baseball has survived for 100 years with umps, it's a part of the sport. Having played baseball at a high level as a catcher mind you, i think it's bad idea. Umps have different strike zones, learn to adapt. One of the best parts for a pitcher is watching umps wring em up.

jah003

3:30p, 6/5/25

In reply to IslanderAg04

IslanderAg04 said:
Who are all the over bearing parents supposed to yell at?

Baseball has survived for 100 years with umps, it's a part of the sport. Having played baseball at a high level as a catcher mind you, i think it's bad idea. Umps have different strike zones, learn to adapt. One of the best parts for a pitcher is watching umps wring em up.

Umps can have different zones that's fine. The issue is umps that change their zone mid game, or some that don't even really have a zone.

VegasAg86

4:03p, 6/5/25

In reply to dabo man

dabo man said:
Quote:
They use it at the Aviators games and it seems to work very well, to me.

MiLB lets managers challenge, too.
At some point not too many years ago, there was a review done of balls/strikes where the robo ump overruled the MiLB ump. The robo umps were actually less accurate than a human.

If they have the technology mastered, I have no need for human beings to be calling balls and strikes. Let the machine do it.

I don't know about those robo umps. The current system is like a k-zone video replay. I don't see how they would determine the video was wrong.

DadHammer

5:25p, 6/5/25

There is a set strike zone by rule based on a players height.

Let the robot system call the entire game. The last detailed report I saw it was much more accurate than a human.

ITS TIME! Sick of the dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox getting every call that may decide a game.

AgRyan04

5:37p, 6/5/25

In reply to VegasAg86

VegasAg86 said:
dabo man said:
Quote:
They use it at the Aviators games and it seems to work very well, to me.

MiLB lets managers challenge, too.
At some point not too many years ago, there was a review done of balls/strikes where the robo ump overruled the MiLB ump. The robo umps were actually less accurate than a human.

If they have the technology mastered, I have no need for human beings to be calling balls and strikes. Let the machine do it.

I don't know about those robo umps. The current system is like a k-zone video replay. I don't see how they would determine the video was wrong.

That's what they put on the Jumbotron.....it's dressed up and less precise looking.....just like when they pan the crowd and put a filter to give the fans the team mascot head

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Kaiser von Wilhelm

7:25p, 6/5/25

The independent league in boise has something like this. I honestly don't know how it's done so fast, but after a called strike/ball, someone (I'm actually not sure if it's the manager or hitter, but assume it is similar to the change in the OP) can challenge the call. It is literally instantaneous, as the PA announcer will say within 2 seconds that there was a challenge and the call was confirmed or reversed, and that they used 1 of 2 challenges. Surprised me how quick it was, and it added zero time to the game to create a delay like regular replay does. For it to happen so quickly, it almost has to come from the hitter, since there was no signal to the ump from the dugout, as that would have taken more time than for the PA announcer to even tell the crowd the results, so I assume it was the hitter making the request. Very interesting and I actually liked it, in limited fashion. 2 seems fair to both the teams and the umpire IMO, as a sort of compromise while allowing umps to keep some pride. Anything more and umps wouldn't go for it. So the whole thing sounds like what the MLB change is proposing, which I personally think would be a good thing. It will also be a way to remind the ****ty umps that they're doing a bad job with proof in front of everyone, but also confirm that the good umps get things right. Just like regular replay has done.

Kaiser von Wilhelm

7:32p, 6/5/25

In reply to RED AG 98

RED AG 98 said:

Relative to college ball, I have a really hard time seeing this mandated across all 300 D1 baseball schools. The money already isn't there now, and that's even before the House settlement for revenue sharing and the greatly increased scholarship limit.

If the ****ty Idaho independent league can implement this, then even small college programs can do it. These programs are almost city league level, and it works well even in the confines of no income, aside from insignificant beer sales and a couple dollar hotdogs.

ensign_beedrill

7:37p, 6/5/25

In reply to DadHammer

DadHammer said:
There is a set strike zone by rule based on a players height.

Let the robot system call the entire game. The last detailed report I saw it was much more accurate than a human.

ITS TIME! Sick of the dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox getting every call that may decide a game.

You think a robot can't be, uh, persuaded to make some, uh, questionable calls?

RikkiTikkaTagem

7:50p, 6/5/25

In reply to Kaiser von Wilhelm

It's should just be an automatic challenge by the hitter or the pitcher if they:

1. Say "that's bull****" or "what the **** blue"
2. Throw their hands up in frustration while looking at the umpire
3. Tap their helmet three times

Sean98

10:57p, 6/5/25

In reply to IslanderAg04

IslanderAg04 said:
Who are all the over bearing parents supposed to yell at?

Baseball has survived for 100 years with umps, it's a part of the sport. Having played baseball at a high level as a catcher mind you, i think it's bad idea. Umps have different strike zones, learn to adapt. One of the best parts for a pitcher is watching umps wring em up.

The fact that umps use the same rule book, but have different zones is EXACTLY the problem.

Is it ok if a 1B ump has a different idea of safe/out? Like I just decide, "well, if he's within 2 feet of the base when the ball arrives then he's safe enough for me." Or an ump has a different idea of a home run? Because a ball off the wall might as well be over the wall.

Heck no. And a ball 4" off the plate shouldn't be a strike just because Morris is drunk and thinks it is.

I think this could actually lead to more enjoyable games as well. We can remove "framing" (i.e, convincing the ump to break the rules) as a major qualification of being a catcher and maybe reward a guy who can just block pitches in the dirt, throw and hit more than .220.

AgRyan04

11:09p, 6/5/25

In reply to Sean98

Amen!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

VegasAg86

8:47a, 6/6/25

In reply to AgRyan04

The system can show the ball is 1.8 inches high. Filters and dressing don't affect a precise placing of the ball. They have a system to determine that placing is wrong? If so, why don't they use it?

safety guy

9:37a, 6/6/25

All you have to do is watch how tennis has adapted to the Hawkeye line calling systems. In the tournaments where there are no line judges, the game flows very well with almost no issues. Every now and then there will be a hiccup with the system but overall, the game is the players. The last big tournament that doesn't use Hawkeye is the French open and it's a cluster of missed calls and umpires going to the court to say a ball was in or out and still be wrong. Baseball players are now trained on their strike zone. No need to change their strike zone based on an umpire.

AgRyan04

9:42a, 6/6/25

In reply to safety guy

We've been watching it in international soccer for 4 oe 5 years now as well.....offsides calls and goals are all called correctly now

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

AgRyan04

9:44a, 6/6/25

In reply to VegasAg86

VegasAg86 said:
The system can show the ball is 1.8 inches high. Filters and dressing don't affect a precise placing of the ball. They have a system to determine that placing is wrong? If so, why don't they use it?

I 1000% AGREE!

To the 1/10th of an inch

Just get the calls correct so the players on the field are the ones determining the outcome of the games!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

nereus

11:22p, 6/6/25

In reply to RED AG 98

RED AG 98 said:
Relative to college ball, I have a really hard time seeing this mandated across all 300 D1 baseball schools. The money already isn't there now, and that's even before the House settlement for revenue sharing and the greatly increased scholarship limit.

I'd like to see the SEC lead the way here. I really wish they'd make it a priority to get this done for 2026 as well, but I just don't know feasible that is at this point. Make that the stretch / trial goal if you must, with full implementation in 2027. Just get it done.

I wouldn't think the SEC will want to do it unless it will be used in the NCAA tournament. Seems like it would be a big disadvantage to have our players get used to it in SEC play only to have to play without it when it really matters.