While I understand the nostalgic sentiment, teams shouldn't be penalized into losing games they should have won due to human error, especially certain humans who have a track record of well above average error making.
Item #9785 https://www.crawfishboxes.com/2019/3/17/18269944/angel-hernandez-the-worst-umpire-in-baseball
It might make baseball more fair, but it probably won't make baseball more fun. It is entertainment after all. But yeah, definitely get rid of the bad umps.
What id like to see initially is a Bot Zone implemented, but not for game calling, but rather for ump evaluation.
Hernandez is an incompetent a**hole with a short temper. Foster is an incompetent a**hole who is obviously corrupted by outside forces. Neither league seems to care.
They already evaluate umps based on Trackman and use it as a training device. It has helped some umpires. I can't remember where I heard/read this from this offseason (probably the Statcast podcast done by MLB), but good umps called about 93% of pitches right. Bad umps were in the upper 80s. Real-time Trackman data was about 97% right with Trackman having an issue in real-time of an error of up to 3 inches on breaking pitches. I suspect MLB would rather people complain about umps missing calls than having people complain when a roboump misses a call even if the later misses less calls. Robo umps can't fix problems with umpires that are unable to calm tense situations.
That is interesting. I suppose what I meant by evaluation was in the context of using it to determine who should actually be an ump and not. That is, fire the guys in the bottom 10-20% and hire/promote guys who can do better. At the very least, the bottom dwellers shouldn't be working the playoffs.
I think once Trackman gets to the point that it is nearly flawless in real-time, it will be implemented. I expect umps will hate this, and MLB knows it. MLB is not looking to anger umps until then as replacement umps suck.
You could have just googled it. https://metsmerizedonline.com/2018/...rnandez-racial-bias-lawsuit-against-mlb.html/ The essence of his argument is about a feud with Joe Torre and also league-wide umpire promotions and WS assignments since Torre was hired. Umpires receive any one of three basic ratings in all of these areas: “exceeds standard”, “meets standard”, or “does not meet standard”. The lawsuit claims that “from 2002 to 2010, Mr. Hernandez received multiple ‘exceeds standard’ ratings” and “did not receive a single ‘does not meet standard’ rating during that same time frame. According to his performance reviews, “Hernandez’ accuracy calling balls and strikes behind the plate increased from 92.19 [percent] in 2002 to 96.88 [percent] in 2016”, adding that “Hernandez’ accuracy was frequently praised by the Office of the Commissioner”. The 24-year veteran umpire claims that despite these consistently glowing reviews from his superiors, things changed considerably when former manager Joe Torre became executive vice president of baseball operations for MLB. Before Torre arrived, Hernandez worked two World Series (2002, 2005), and six League Championship Series. Since Torre’s arrival, the Cuban native has not received one World Series assignment and has received a multitude of not-just-performance based criticism’s from Torre, personally. According to the suit, Torre’s issue with Hernandez stemmed from a “perceived incorrect call” that took place in May 2001 when Torre was managing the Yankees. After the game, Torre lashed out, “taking to the media to insult” Hernandez. ... Since MLB unified the former American League and National League umpiring associations, “there have been at least 23 umpires promoted to crew chief”, adding that all have been white. It’s also noted that there have been 34 umpires assigned to the World Series since Torre joined the Commissioners Office, all of whom were white.
I think the latter parts of what I quoted is more what he's using to allege racial bias. The other parts seem to more allege retaliatory treatment or something.
It sounds like from that article, MLB and Angel were fine prior to Torre. Torre seems to be the source of the retaliation and his issue with Hernandez does not seem to be racially motivated. The race of other umps is not relevant unless Torre held a grudge against them as well for perceived bad calls, but wasn't allowed to retaliate against them because they were white.
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. I don't know anything beyond the article, but I'm assuming the ump is alleging: * MLB considered him a good umpire * Torre took over and holds a grudge against him for a bad call * Torre's grudge is racially motivated (ie, I guess he doesn't hold similar grudges against white umpires?) and has resulted in a lack of employment opportunities. * Torre's race-bias is supported in general by the fact that only white umps have been promoted / put in the WS I have no idea of the merits of any of the above and what evidence links all of that, but I assume the lawsuit would try to make that argument, while the article wouldn't go into all the details. He seems to be using two distinct lines of argument to make his lawsuit (personal grudge and racial bias).
It could be that he's generally really accurate but his wrong ones are really, really wrong? That would still measure as a high % correct but fans and players would just notice a lot of really terrible ones.
I assume the suit is alleging that there was racial bias. Personal grudge doesn't scream racism to me when it stems from an alleged bad call. Considering nearly all umps are white, the lack of promotions/Worlds Series appearances doesn't scream racism to me at all. If he was saying only white umps have been hired since Torre became his boss, that would be a different matter. I'm not sure if Angel good or not calling strikes, but things tend to get heated when he makes a bad call.
Again, why can't it do both? I haven't read the lawsuit, so I have no idea how he links the two. That's fine - that would go the merits of the suit and what MLB would argue. That doesn't have anything to do with what the ump is alleging. Here's another article on it: https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2...iring-racism-discrimination-lawsuit-joe-torre Many have dismissed the case based on the fact that Hernandez is a terrible umpire and therefore deservedly sits out World Series games and crew chief appointments. But here’s the thing: It’s possible for Hernandez to both be bad at his job and be discriminated against. One does not preclude the other, and it may even be the case that he was chosen as a target on the pretense of his poor performance masking the discrimination, which has been a method utilized by other employers throughout American history. .... Hernandez further contends that this grudge is racially motivated and reveals larger racial trends in baseball. Only one of the 10 umpires promoted to crew chief since 2011 has been more experienced than Hernandez, who’s been an umpire for 24 years; since 2000, no game has featured a minority permanent crew chief (Hernandez served as interim crew chief for portions of the 2005 and 2012 seasons). Since 2010, 34 of the 35 World Series umpires have been white, and the notoriously hot-headed Joe West has appeared in two of them (2012, 2016). The most recent World Series featured none of the top five umpires in terms of accuracy, instead choosing the second-worst, John Hirschbeck, as well as a number of veterans. Experience, therefore, must weigh more heavily in the selection process than accuracy/performance. Though many do not take seriously Hernandez as a competent umpire, it is imperative at least to entertain his charge of racial discrimination against MLB. Indeed, it reflects a larger trend of racism in MLB and in American society at large. Of the roughly 100 umpires in MLB, only 10 are non-white, a trend that carries down through the minors, but one that MLB states it is trying to reverse. ... Hernandez’s suit further speaks to the practice of denying minorities leadership positions. As of 2014, under 5 percent of Fortune 500 companies were headed by minorities; the trend applies to heads of academic institutions, politicians, and cultural leaders. Placing minorities in positions of authority poses a threat of overturning embedded systems of racism and therefore dispersing the power accrued by white males. It is therefore ‘safer’ for companies and institutions to develop a facade of racial inclusion by employing minorities in lower-level positions, forcing them to operate within a racist system. The last part goes to your point about hiring trends vs promotions / World Series duties. It's similar to the past arguments in the NFL that black players were welcomed, but not as QBs. Or that black coaches could get hired as assistants, but not as head coaches.
