The umpire is out to get us! Or is he?

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

May 29, 2015
3,731
113
I didn’t want to highjack another thread, but recent discussion about bias on here has an uncanny timing. The Kansas City Royals’ manager decided to publicly decry a veteran umpire as biased and out to “get them.” A fact finding mission turned up some interesting results ...

 
Aug 5, 2015
85
8
That site sucks because they build in a large margin of error, so much that basically any close pitch can be called either way and be right. So the KC pitcher could throw 10 straight edge pitches, the ump could call them all balls and be 100% "right". Then the other team could throw those exact 10 pitches and they could be all called strikes, and again, the ump would be 100% "right" and there would be "no bias".
 
Last edited:
May 29, 2015
3,731
113
Well, I totally disagree with that statement and would endorse them for information on umpiring and MLB rules.

I would post a link to their research on electronic strike zones and the egregious errors of the systems in use, but it sounds as if you already have your mind made up. Their podcast episode on the topic was very enlightening (the level of ignorance of the people who are behind some of those systems was astonishing).

I’d love to know what you are basing your opinion on. And just like that, a thread created to avoid a highjack has been highjacked in just a few posts. 😋
 

marriard

Not lost - just no idea where I am
Oct 2, 2011
4,312
113
Florida
In 30+ years at all levels of officiating countless games across multiple sports I have seen a grand total of 5 games where an official was intentionally bias against a team and none of those incidents were in any game I would consider really meaningful.

And I am not saying there isn't unconscious or unintentional bias - because they are all actually humans. The best officials I have worked with understand this and work to minimize it when they can. I have never, ever thought "I am going to get XXX because he called me a XXX'.

Also we all have good and bad games - just like players - and just like players some umpires handle making a mistake better than others. Some spiral down. Some recover. Some are great at umpiring. Some are really not cut out for it. Some are average.

Most I know are out there trying to officiate to the best of their capabilities. Even the jerks who are not, are still not intentionally favoring one team over another.

Note: I am going to exclude the betting scandal BS from the NBA. Even then, the officiating was not to make a team win or lose, but to try to influence the spread. That is just bad people and not really relevant to some weekend kids sports game (unless you are in Miami watching & gambling on 12 year olds playing football)
 
Last edited:

Josh Greer

DFP Vendor
Jul 31, 2013
934
93
Central Missouri
So an MLB pitcher's belief is that an umpire's bias existed and therefore should be replaced by a computer. OK, so if a pitcher's bias exists and hits a batter, should he be replaced by a pitching machine. And if a batter's bias leads him to yell at a pitcher who celebrated striking him out, should he be replaced by a robot. Eventually, this whole sport will turn into a video game.

Yea, the umpire shouldn't be the center of attention. But just like the managers, the grounds crew, and the announcers, they are a part of the game. And there is something awesome about being the best at something in any chosen field. If the instant replay (which I still hate) has taught us anything, it is that the umpires get it right most of the time. MLB slices and dices the call from a dozen cameras, frame by frame. I'm amazed at what most umpires can see in real time (all of this excludes Angel Hernandez....that's a different conversation). I would hate to eliminate a craft that has been in the refining process as long as the game has existed.
 
May 29, 2015
3,731
113
That site sucks because they build in a large margin of error, so much that basically any close pitch can be called either way and be right. So the KC pitch could throw 10 straight edge pitches, the ump could call them all balls and be 100% "right". Then the other team could throw those exact 10 pitches and they could be all called strikes, and again, the ump would be 100% "right" and there would be "no bias".

It occurred to me that you may be mistaking MLB’s data and processes with CCS’s analysis. I’ll await an explanation from you after posting this one. Then maybe we can try to get back to the discussion of bias of a coach/fan/player vs. bias of an umpire.


 
Aug 5, 2015
85
8
Well, I totally disagree with that statement and would endorse them for information on umpiring and MLB rules.

I would post a link to their research on electronic strike zones and the egregious errors of the systems in use, but it sounds as if you already have your mind made up. Their podcast episode on the topic was very enlightening (the level of ignorance of the people who are behind some of those systems was astonishing).

I’d love to know what you are basing your opinion on. And just like that, a thread created to avoid a highjack has been highjacked in just a few posts. 😋
What I said was 100% right, from the site itself.

With your username and this post, it seems like you're the one with the bias.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,481
Members
21,445
Latest member
Bmac81802
Top