PDA

View Full Version : The Questec system: Is it good or bad?



HumnHilghtFreel
08-09-2006, 09:04 PM
Sorry if this has been brought up before, I'm still fairly new around here.

Since George Grande brought up a point tonight about the umpires in the series catching flak for being inconsistent with their balls and strikes, I was just wondering what you guys thought about the Questec system. Is it a good or a bad thing, is it effective at all?

I think it has its high and low points. Since an ump is basically being graded, he's going to at least try to be more efficient with his calls. What I don't like about it though, is the fact that it kind of takes away from the human nature of the game, which oddly enough, is the reason that MLB has said they don't want Instant Replay.

Thoughts, anyone?

Dunner44
08-09-2006, 09:26 PM
I'd just use the questec system... umps can still call plays at he plate and such, but if we have a system that can call stuff consistently, use it

StillFunkyB
08-09-2006, 09:39 PM
I would normally say that I don't like any kind of technology when it comes to something like this. Call me a traditionalist, of sorts.

However, the newer umpires in the league are quite bad. I can live with not calling a strike, or a wide zone, as long as it is that way the whole game. The problem lately is that these umpires are not sticking with their strikezone. Very erratic.

I am for questec as far as it trying to help improve umpires consistency, not necessarily the zone itself.

Unassisted
08-09-2006, 11:33 PM
Usually the umpires with the most inconsistent strike zones are the ones with the quickest ejection thumb. Take that ejection thumb out of the equation and let Questec do it.

MWM
08-09-2006, 11:42 PM
Questec is just exposing the umps for being bad. The overall quality of umpiring in the majors is embarassing, IMO.

Ltlabner
08-10-2006, 07:27 AM
I'm sure it's said every year, but the umps this year seem to be dreadfull. That is my perception anyway, not sure if there are any stats to back that up. Strike zones have been horribly inconsistant and there's been a boatlaod of blown calls.

Any system that can help correct this problem warrents investigation. However, I doubt MLP (read: Bud Selig) would allow anything that would be (1) controversial or (2) result in squables with the umps.

Newman4
08-10-2006, 08:14 AM
I'm sure it's said every year, but the umps this year seem to be dreadfull. That is my perception anyway, not sure if there are any stats to back that up. Strike zones have been horribly inconsistant and there's been a boatlaod of blown calls.

Any system that can help correct this problem warrents investigation. However, I doubt MLP (read: Bud Selig) would allow anything that would be (1) controversial or (2) result in squables with the umps.

I agree. The last two series against LA and St. Louis have been a prime example. Almost every game it seems there has been at least one missed call. Like you guys, I don't have any stats just observation.

RFS62
08-10-2006, 08:20 AM
I've said for years that balls and strikes should be called by a system like Questec.

Let the ump make the hand signal, but make it like line calls in tennis.

redsmetz
08-10-2006, 09:48 AM
I think I'm going to choose to disagree, although I have to say that I have to throw out a huge caveat. I wonder if the Questec system isn't partly to blame. I think umps are losing their eye for a strike zone and I wonder if that's not causing the continuing erratic strike zones. Is it possible that some umpires are calling to their perception of what Questec is going to say instead developing their own strike zone and sticking with.

Technology is great and I'm going to try an analogy here that perhaps will completely break down, but I'll try. I'm not mechanic, but I remember folks who used to be able to work on an engine and they could just get a feel for the adjustment that needed to be made, but now that it's all done by computer, sometimes you don't quite get that perfection the guy with a screw driver could just eke out of an engine.

I'm not convinced Questec is the answer. Certainly it's not if there are no consequences for the pathetic inconsistancies we're now seeing (and I was at that game in Milwaukee two Fridays ago where everybody there was complaining about that ump). But also, I think we're losing umpires being able to know the zone on their own.

Of course, I don't want to lose the human dimension.

Just my humble opinion.

Yachtzee
08-10-2006, 02:38 PM
Strike zones were pretty bad before Questec. A good battery could expand the ump's strike zone to give them an extra six inches off the plate. Maddux and Glavine were the prime examples when they were with the Braves. I can handle umps missing a call here or there because they're concerned about Questec if it means that all pitchers are subject to the same strike zone.

KronoRed
08-10-2006, 05:07 PM
It's good and should be in every park.

And when the system is further refined balls and strikes should be completely removed from the umps.

RedsManRick
08-10-2006, 06:02 PM
It's a great tool for umpire evalutation and training. I would say that it has no place being used actively in the course of the game.

Blitz Dorsey
08-11-2006, 02:28 AM
I like it. Anything that makes the umpires accountable is a good thing in my book. The inconsistencies and inaccuracies of MLB strike zones have always been a huge peeve of mine.

Let them still call balls and strikes, but after each game they are graded. Too many bad grades, XX percentage for the season, and you're done. Or at least docked pay, suspended, etc.