DANIEL STYLER
<Staff Writer>
In Major League Baseball, there is only one situation where replay is permitted to review an umpire’s decision: on debatable home runs, where it is unclear whether or not the ball actually went over the fence.
This is a relatively rare occurrence. After all, there are, on average, slightly less than two home runs hit per game. The chance that one of those home runs will be contentious is not high. It is nice that MLB is interested in making sure that these types of calls are correct, but the league’s refusal to expand replay to other areas seems to put pre-eminence on a very minute aspect of the game.
For instance, there are usually between 250-300 pitches thrown on a game-to-game basis. Whether or not they are called balls or strikes is incredibly important. The ball-strike count dictates how both batter and pitcher approach an at-bat, is predictive of their success and can impact whether base runners decide to attempt a stolen base.
The problem is that it is not particularly easy for umpires to correctly decide whether or not a pitch is a ball or a strike; pitchers throw up to 100 miles per hour, and their pitches break significantly as they approach the plate. NoMaas.org, a New York Yankees satire website, examined an umpire’s success rate in a recent game and concluded that 15 percent of his ball-strike calls in an April 6th game between the Yankees and Tampa Bay were incorrect. Such an evaluation is made possible by PitchFX, which helps to track the trajectories of pitches.
I do not think that it is an over-generalization to suggest that this type of incompetence is almost expected. It is often painful to watch a baseball game when the broadcast you are watching has a similar strike zone chart to that employed by PitchFX, because you can see exactly how many times your team had an unfair call go against them. This frustration is equally applicable to incorrect out or safe calls at bases and fair or foul calls down the baselines that immediately become obvious thanks to the use of slow-motion replays.
Why is Major League Baseball okay with their incredibly well-paid umpires continuing to negatively impact the outcome of games?
I have no idea; indeed, it seems pretty clear to me that the net impact of an umpire should be zero if a game is to be decided on the merit of each team.
What I do know is there are plenty of people who argue that it is “the human element” and “part of the game.” My response to this type of argument is this: In what area of life is failure appealing? If I failed a test or fell down a set of stairs, I would almost certainly love the possibility that I could have some sort of do-over to correct my mistake. In addition, the “human element” of failure and success would seem to be applicable to players, not umpires.
What I also know is that the general failure of umpires is exacerbated by the fact that they often refuse to be held accountable for their mistakes. When umpire Jim Joyce cost former Detroit Tiger pitcher Armando Galarraga a perfect game on what would have been the final out of the game (he called a player safe at first base when it was quite obvious that he was out), it was actually refreshing to see him tearfully profess that he “took a perfect game away from that kid over there.”
That type of response is not typical. Umpires are not required to grant interviews after games (and very rarely do), and often the best a fan can hope for when a mistake is made is some type of generic statement that is released by the head umpire of the game. Often, umpires will actually deny having made a mistake when there is clear evidence to the contrary. For instance, after calling New York Yankee Mark Teixeira out when he was clearly safe at first base (this is pictured below, and was the last out in an important game), umpire Jerry Meals did not say anything. In his place, crew chief Mike Winters said, “That was just a very, very close play” and was “inconclusive” from the replay they saw. The problem is that the play wasn’t close, and it cost the Yankees a game.
What can be done to solve this fairly obvious problem?
In response to Joyce’s mistake, Commissioner Bud Selig suggested that while “the human element has always been an integral part of baseball, it is vital that mistakes on the field be addressed” and said that he would examine the umpiring system and expanded instant replay.
This happened two years ago and there still haven’t been any changes implemented. While there is talk about changes occurring in the near future, they haven’t happened yet.
My belief is that the best system is one that makes use of technological advancements in a way that keeps the game moving at a relatively quick pace. It is no longer acceptable for managers to be immediately ejected for arguing mistakes home plate umpires make when calling balls and strikes. There is too much evidence suggesting that the managers are very often right to support such a practice.
The issue of balls and strikes could easily be solved by replacing home plate umpires with PitchFX-equipped robots, who would have at least close to a one hundred percent success rate. This is not going to happen, though; not in an old-fashioned league terrified of progress.
What needs to take place, then, is a dramatic shift in baseball’s unwillingness to adopt expansive replay systems: managers should have a certain number of challenges that can be used throughout the game (much like the NFL). These types of disputes can be solved relatively easily with the use of replay, and I have no doubt that this type of system is preferable to what is currently in place.
Also, if 18-year-old rookies are held accountable by the media after games when they make mistakes, why shouldn’t umpires have the same responsibility?
Games matter to too many people who invest time, money and emotion into their favourite team. It is time to get things right, robots or not.