It took a high-profile non-call on an obvious pass interference in the NFC Championship Game for the NFL to finally make pass interference reviewable. And don't be surprised if some high-profile missed calls by home plate umpire Lance Barksdale last night in Game 5 results in MLB introducing the long-talked-about robo ump. Especially after Game 5, those calls are getting louder!
Simply put, Barksdale did NOT have a good game behind the plate. In the sixth inning, a beautiful pitch to Michael Brantley hit the inside corner and sure looked like an obvious strike. Barksdale called it a ball, evidently because Nationals catcher Yan Gomes stood up too fast. Gomes, knowing his pitcher made the pitch, popped up to make the throw down to third. Yet Barksdale thought that by doing that he was showing him up. So he called it a ball. In the World Series! Sorry, but the World Series is no place for a pissing contest between a catcher and an umpire.
Then, in the bottom of the seventh, it got even worse. Gerrit Cole threw the EXACT SAME PITCH on consecutive 3-2 counts to Ryan Zimmerman and Victor Robles. The first one he called a ball, resulting in a walk to Zimmerman. With Robles up, though, he called it a strike, ending the inning. The replays showed that the pitch didn't just end up out of the strike zone, it was never a strike to begin with!
None of those calls are why the Nationals lost the game. Gerrit Cole beat them, not Lance Barksdale. But what it did illustrate is the need for consistency. Barksdale seemed to have two different strike zones. One for Gerrit Cole, one for the Nationals' pitchers. And, as the live mic that caught his exchange with Gomes showed us, he let his ego factor into his decision-making process. Which is also something that should never happen. Especially in the World Series.
Negotiations for a new contract between Major League Baseball and the umpires' union are set to begin soon. And you can bet the robo ump will be at the forefront of those discussions. Because, like instant replay, robot umpires seem inevitable. So we might as well embrace it. And, like replay, the robo ump might actually help.
Like many, I was skeptical about the idea of a robo umpire at first. Then I saw it in action at an Atlantic League game and realized it's not really as bad as we all thought. All it is is a box positioned behind home plate that relays a signal to the (human) home plate umpire whether or not the pitch ended up in the strike zone.
Frankly, it's not nearly as obtrusive as I expected it to be. AND, it's a lot more objective. Because it has the same strike zone for anybody. The machine has no idea if it's Gerrit Cole or Joe Ross or me out there. And it doesn't care, either. Which it shouldn't.
One of the most frequent complaints batters have about home plate umpires is strike zone inconsistency. Robo umps would take care of that. They also don't like it when the zone expands. If you give the pitcher one corner, they can make an adjustment. If you give the pitcher both, they can't. Likewise, if you want to call the low pitch a strike, fine. Then let the batter have the high pitch. Especially when he can't hit it. (If the batter can't hit the pitch, it's most likely not a strike!) Just like the robo ump would be the same for every pitcher, it'd be the same for every hitter.
Most importantly, the robo ump isn't removing the human umpire from the game. It's simply a tool to assist them in doing their job. Just like replay, which has been embraced by everyone. The whole point of replay is to get the call right. It's the same thing with the robo ump. It helps them make the call on borderline pitches and takes the blame away from them when people don't like the call.
After introducing it in the Atlantic League, they're also trying it out in the Arizona Fall League. Admittedly, there are still some bugs to work out. If a pitch bounces and ends up in the zone, it gets registered as a strike when it's obviously not. But those are simple fixes. And that's another reason why the human umpire isn't going anywhere. He'd have override power in situations like that (and he obviously would need to call plays at the plate, etc.).
Ultimately, I don't think the robo umpire would be nearly as bad as we originally all thought. And if you can get a traditionalist like me on board, that's saying something! But I'm not the only convert. A number of players, managers and team executives who were originally skeptical/hesitant have changed their opinion about robo umps, too.
And, just like the NFC Championship Game and pass interference, the magnified setting of the World Series has only increased the momentum in the direction of robo umpires. It might not be next season, but it sure looks like it's going to happen sooner rather than later. Personally, I don't think it can happen soon enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment