HawkShack.com

Major League Baseball is experimenting with robot umpires in at least one of their AAA leagues (one step below the majors) this season:

Robot umpires have been given a promotion and will be just one step from the major leagues this season. Major League Baseball is expanding its automated strike zone experiment to Triple-A, the highest level of the minor leagues.

MLB's website posted a hiring notice seeking seasonal employees to operate the Automated Ball-Strike system. MLB said it is recruiting employees to operate the system for the Albuquerque Isotopes, Charlotte Knights, El Paso Chihuahuas, Las Vegas Aviators, Oklahoma City Dodgers, Reno Aces, Round Rock Express, Sacramento River Cats, Salt Lake Bees, Sugar Land Skeeters and Tacoma Rainiers.

The independent Atlantic League became the first American professional league to let a computer call balls and strikes at its All-Star Game in July 2019 and experimented with ABS during the second half of that season. The system also was used in the Arizona Fall League for top prospects in 2019, drawing complaints of its calls on breaking balls.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/331 ... or-leagues

The most common complaint between fan bases around the NFL is the officiating. Are there any applications in football that the NFL could use from baseball's strike zone application? Can they put some type of laser reflector into a football that can't be obscured that would show if a ball broke the plane of the goal line or first down line or if a QB was beyond the LOS when he released a pass? Can they have cameras fixed on all 22 players that can detect holding or pass interference? How about play clock violations? How many times have we seen an offense snap the ball after the play clock has expired?

Is there a time in the near future where we will see the complete elimination of the human element in officiating? Is that something that we really want?

I think the game could benefit from more electronic automation of calls but it is not going to work for every situation. One obvious potential use for it would be field goals and extra points where there was a question of whether or not the ball traveled inside or outside the uprights. Another one might be determining if line to gain was reached instead of bringing out the chains.

trents wrote:I think the game could benefit from more electronic automation of calls but it is not going to work for every situation. One obvious potential use for it would be field goals and extra points where there was a question of whether or not the ball traveled inside or outside the uprights. Another one might be determining if line to gain was reached instead of bringing out the chains.

I don't think those situations are controversial enough. It's pretty easy for a human eye to detect whether or not a FG attempt was above the cross bar and between the posts. It's not a bang-bang type play and the refs have plenty of time to get into position and be ready to concentrate on the ball. Same deal with the chains.

There are a few pre snap situations, like the play clock expiring and if a player jumps or lines up offside or if a lineman moves, that some type of automated detection system might be helpful. But the most controversial calls involve pass interference, holding, and personal foul penalties.

If they could put ultra light weight electronics inside the ball and use GPS that would help with getting line to gain calls right.

trents wrote:If they could put ultra light weight electronics inside the ball and use GPS that would help with getting line to gain calls right.

That's kinda what I was thinking, but it would have to penetrate human hands, arms, legs, etc.

trents wrote:If they could put ultra light weight electronics inside the ball and use GPS that would help with getting line to gain calls right.

Yeah my thought . Make every square inch of the ball visible to the technology, some sort of coating or film under the skin during manufacture. Couple that with video technology that can be replayed in real time with an alarm or something if the ball crosses a first down or TD. Was the runner down or not? It might be valuable in those scrums where you cant see anything in short yardage.

I still think replay is the best tool we have. It just needs expanded to include everything , calls and non calls. Most other sports have some form of it.

I do like the consistency of automation and the lack of corruption. But human umpires are more fun. Be hard to see a manager arguing with a machine.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I do like the consistency of automation and the lack of corruption. But human empires are more fun. Be hard to see a manager arguing with a machine.

That I agree with. Part of life is learning how to deal with adversity, discrimination, and unfair treatment, and there's an argument to be made that we are better people because we've had to grow up tough. Why should we expect sports to be perfect when society is so far from it?

Besides, it would take away the drama surrounding, "We was wobbed!" in the immortal words of Elmer Fudd. What else would we talk about?

trents wrote:Besides, it would take away the drama surrounding, "We was wobbed!" in the immortal words of Elmer Fudd. What else would we talk about?

You're preaching to the choir, Bro. Besides, where would all the conspiracy theorists go, the ones that claim the league rigs these games in favor or against certain teams?

RiverDog wrote:
You're preaching to the choir, Bro. Besides, where would all the conspiracy theorists go, the ones that claim the league rigs these games in favor or against certain teams?

Ok here we go . I’ll bite . I’ve never said there’s a league edict or money changing hands . But refs are celebrities in their own right , enjoy being the center of attention. And they know what outcome benefits the leagues bottom line . If you want to say the officiating in 40 was ok , the no call on Dee Jay vs the Rams . They are too well trained to miss those things . I’m for any measure that keeps the game out of the hands of the celebrity refs . How well are they vetted for gambling ties ?

trents wrote:Besides, it would take away the drama surrounding, "We was wobbed!" in the immortal words of Elmer Fudd. What else would we talk about?

Exactly. How do you claim you were robbed and have the NFL look into the matter if the press release is "Were checking our software for errors?" That's not fun.

And no Ed Hochuli the Jacked Ref. It would just be some machine. It's not as fun to scream, "The machine screwed us. What is its brand name?"

Hochulis son sucks as bad as his dad . He was the no call on the ridiculous interference on Dee Jay crew leader .

You all think it’s har de har. I don’t like second generation celebrity refs deciding my lowly teams demise . Let us do it ourselves as I’m sure we will actually I was watching a bit of that Dallas 9ers ending and AI technology would have been huge . I’m trying to remember an official re spotting and re measuring a ball based on replay in that type of situation . Of course bonehead Dak wound up blowing any chance but that was huge . I don’t blame the referees at the end . Dak checked to the run out of 2 plays and then didn’t know the rules . Any team with a 40 million Qb running a sneak from the 40 with 14 seconds no ref on the planet can save them .

I think the only thing AI would be good for at this point is players off side or lining up off side.
Those wouldn't be missed, but I don't think motion rulings would be helped much at this point as most of the rules have a lot of vague
language in them that muddies the waters. There's still controversy at times with what a catch is, so expecting a computer to determine
nuance within the rules is at this point something we shouldn't expect.

Baseball on the other hand has clearly defined strike zones that lends itself to using technology and it being quite effective.

NorthHawk wrote:I think the only thing AI would be good for at this point is players off side or lining up off side.
Those wouldn't be missed, but I don't think motion rulings would be helped much at this point as most of the rules have a lot of vague
language in them that muddies the waters. There's still controversy at times with what a catch is, so expecting a computer to determine
nuance within the rules is at this point something we shouldn't expect.

Baseball on the other hand has clearly defined strike zones that lends itself to using technology and it being quite effective.

I think that there would be other applications for AI that wouldn't require a technological breakthrough, like play clock violations. It should be pretty easy to detect when the ball moves vs. when the clock strikes zero. As it stands, now, there's a lot of ambiguity as the ref on the field has to look up and see the clock at zero and the play not having started. If nothing else, they could have the replay ref stop the play if the play clock expires before the ball is snapped. One less thing for the refs on the field to worry about.

Yup, play clock is another one, but those are minor things and it would help, no doubt but the major calls would still have the human element in them.
On a side note I would like to see Earl Weaver try using the brim of his hat to peck at a computer over balls and strikes like he did to umpires.

NorthHawk wrote:Yup, play clock is another one, but those are minor things and it would help, no doubt but the major calls would still have the human element in them.
On a side note I would like to see Earl Weaver try using the brim of his hat to peck at a computer over balls and strikes like he did to umpires.

Oh, I agree, which is why I mentioned earlier that the most controversial and impactful calls are pass interference, holding, and personal fouls. AI doesn't currently have the capability to make such a determination, and even if it could, I don't think that we'd want to go that far.

Along with Earl Weaver, Billy Martin and Sweet Lou would have a hard time intimidating a computer.

I remember hearing about Curt Schilling, who got so upset at a ball/strike computer that MLB was using to evaluate umpires as he felt it was causing him not to get the corners that he took a bat to it and smashed it to smithereens:

Umpires who don't like the new electronic system that evaluates their calls on balls and strikes have gained an outspoken ally in Curt Schilling.

The Arizona ace got so fed up with the system Saturday night during his loss to the San Diego Padres that he smashed one of its cameras near the Diamondbacks' dugout.

"I said something to one of the umpires about it,'' Schilling said, "and he said 'Do us a favor and break the other one.'''

The QuesTec Umpire Evaluation System is installed at 13 ballparks, including Bank One Ballpark in Arizona. The umpire's union has filed a grievance against major league teams contending the system is inaccurate and varies greatly depending on the person operating it.

https://a.espncdn.com/mlb/news/2003/0525/1558965.html