Are Umpires ruining the game of baseball, or is technology?

[ConF1ictz]

my friend and i had an arguement yesterday debating whether umpires should be on the field at this point in 2010, being technology has taken over. My arguement was that he doesnt have enough respect for the game that avid baseball players do. he said he played baseball when he was young and he said he has more respect than i do. i see this as him trying to defend an empty arguement because ive been playing since i was 9 and made the travel team for my league at age 12 and played with all different types of umpires, and i have extreme amounts of respect, where he played for few years when he was a small boy. Also, he says that techniques such as "framing" are "cheating", and compares it to adding cards to your hand in a poker game, justifiying cheating in sports is wrong. Against this, im saying that a lot of "techniques" such as framing, are part of the sport, whether youre tricking the umpire or not.

my friend suggests that they should have lasers that determine balls and strikes, and replays should determine safe/out and homeruns that skim the foul pole. i say that theres ways around everything so it doesnt matter what you have. it would also slow the game down!!

you also have to understand my friend is a stubborn **** who always thinks hes right. thats why i brought this here to ask all of you how you feel on the arguement.im not sure i made everything clear but just ask if you need something clarified.

 

[1048576]

If you think fooling the refs is a useful skill that's entertaining to watch, then you should be against technology. If you think the actual athletic skill is what's entertaining and loathe the theatrics, then you should be in favor of technology.

Consider this though: the best umpire would get every call right. He would essentially be the same as a computer. The worst umpires are the ones that are going to be fooled by all the shenanigans. So following your position that "framing" is a part of the game, shouldn't baseball stop striving to find good umpires who aren't fooled by that sort of thing and just round up random unbiased spectators to call the games?

 

[ConF1ictz]

true, but with the advance of technology, would it be ok to totally eliminate the use of umpires. do you think that a computer should overtake the sport. my personal opinion is that...yes they screw up sometimes, but they are there for a reason and keep order in the game. they make the calls and thats it. do you think that fair and foul should be determined by a line, a computer, or a human neither of these are reffective in my opinion because you can get around all 3 of them. do you think a box of lasers should determine a strike, and what if a check swing is calculated as a full one. this is another thing i think is very important because there are 2 umpires. 1 for the balls and strikes and 1 to determine a check swing on every single pitch in a baseball game. would technology be effective in this way. i dont think it would being the computer can read something wrong, on top of calibration for each individual player. on top of the fact that replays would totally slow the game down. what youre not getting is that technoolgy is continuely ruining games to show how bad a call was or how close it actually was. to be honest, a random unbiased spectator is exactly what an umpire is. he calls it how it looks and no matter what the call is, someone is going to get mad. whether it be the team that was scored, or the team that thought he was out, and vice versa.

 

[1048576]

I don't know what you're trying to say. It seems like you want calls to be as fast and correct as possible. In some cases, that requires using a computer. In others, a well-trained human. What's the debate here?

 

[ConF1ictz]

what im argueing is, does americas past time sport need umpires?

 

[Flutter NiTE]

No sport needs Referees or Umpires, technology took over. Technology has flaws, so it is always good to have someone observing.

Basically, they aren't needed, but I would think they are wanted for there take / opinion.


I don't follow baseball / sports, so...

 

[Nicholas1024]

I'd keep the refs, and simply go to instant replay if there's a dispute over the call. Maybe what, one in ten calls are disputed? Going to instant replay over those wouldn't be that big of a deal, (Just keep another ump in a booth with the instant replay to make final judgement), and it would prevent games being decided because of awful calls.

 

[A1lion835]

As an avid baseball fan, I wouldn't mind the delay that came with technology, but many would. I agree with Nicholas: keep the umpires and go into the booth for disputed calls. I'd rather not see something like Galarraga's masterpiece ruined again.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

I'm all for instant replays. Do we want another almost-perfect game?