I do not intend this post to be a place to whine or complain about bad umpiring as something that is 'unfair.'  There is nothing to suggest that if umpiring were perfect the Mariners would win any more games.  However, in my opinion, bad umpiring is 'unfun.'  Rather this post presents one simple analogy based argument that I use when having this conversation.  It has helped me begin to convince the more 'traditionalist' fans I know.   

I just focus on the idea of using a computer to call balls and strikes.  This is because arguments about replay on base path calls have a lot of other factors (the system, delays etc.). 

There have been lots of arguments about robot balls and strikes, and these arguments will continue.  I won't try to encapsulate them here.  But, one of the arguments against robots is that the 'human factor' is part of the game. 

The idea, as I understand it, is that pitchers and batters must read an umpire, test him out, figure his tendencies, and his idiosyncricies, and incorporate this.  That adjusting to a wandering or non regulation strike zone, is a skill to be appreciated. Also, there is the idea that human umpires place a certain unpredictability into the game which makes it better. 

So here's what I say when someone presents me with this argument:

'Let's pretend that I start a new umpiring school. This school uses advanced eye excercises and meditation in order to train umpires who are near prefection.  These new techniques allow umpires to continualy improve in the accuracy and consistency of their calls.  Are you going to create a rule banning umpires from going to my school?'

It usually gets them thinking in the right direction.  It really helps people realize that they just generally feel more comfortable with people being involved, the way they always have, and that claims about 'human factors' are really just justifications to excuse a general sense of unease with robots being better than people at stuff. 

I know it's not original, or 'my idea,' or anything, it's just a useful analogy that I thought I would share.  Of course it isn't a coincidence that I felt compelled to share this after watchign Angel Hernandez butcher the 'strike zone.' 

EDIT: After reading some insightful comments, I believe I can summarize my point in a clearer fashion.  Imagine a world where umpires never make any mistakes.  Where replays never contradict a call, and where pitchfx data shows the correct strike/ball call was made on every pitch.  Would we complain about such a world?  Would we lament our inability to relate to the umpires because of their unwavering perfection?  Would we wish that they got a call wrong every now and then, just to keep the game interesting?  Would we long for a wandering and slightly less predictable strike zone?  Or, would we happily relate to the fallibility of the *players* as they played the game as impressive, but still mistake prone, humans?  My suggestion is that we would not have an issue with such a world.  To me, this means that an aversion to computer or computer assisted umpiring is based on a psychological unease toward technology, and that any claims of 'human aspect to the game' are justifications of this general unease.   

I'm a Mariners fan visiting from my home blog of Lookout Landing to ask for some advice regarding Camden Yards.  I apologize in advance if I accidentally violate any rules or norms you follow over here.

I currently live in DC and am planning on going up to Camden Yards for the M's-O's games on May 11, 12 and 13.  I know it's a ways away, but I don't get to go to very many M's games, so I'm planning in advance.  Lookout Landing is currently running a series on advice about going to games at Safeco (and if you're ever going to go through Seattle you should go read it, it's pretty good).  That gave me the idea to come over here and ask the readers here about watching a game in Camden.    

Continue reading this post »

I have been thinking that this site could benefit from Open Threads.

I thought there was some particular place reserved for recommendations for improvements to the site, but I couldn't find it and I apologize if it is still around.

Most political bloggers will be familar with what an Open Thread is.  It's just a thread on the front page where people can discuss any topic relevant to the site.  In this case, the Mariners.  There are a lot of potential discussion topics that aren't big enough to justify a fanpost.  Recently I've been curious about this community's take on a particular subject or wanted to make a post-game observation but there isn't really a place for these general discussions.

Generally the game-notes thread can fill this role, as small observations or questions are often game specific.  But when there isn't a game-notes thread, or when there are gaps between games I think that an occasional Open Thread would see good use.

I'm relatively new here, so I apologize if this has been discussed and rejected in the past.

  The inspiration for this post is Dave's post over at USS Mariner where he recommends that the Mariners trade Washburn and Bedard for J.J. Hardy.  This post is not to rehash that argument.  If you want to argue about that then please read that post here.  Be sure to read all the comments there first so people aren't just talking in circles (it's worth a try to say, right?). 

  My intent behind this fanpost is to ask the LL community what we think Washburn's and Bedard's value are.  Where I have a hard time is with the following:

1. Bedard's trade value is low because he is injury prone

2. Washburn's trade value is low because he's not actually that good

3. They both are free agents at the end of the year - and we can't sign either to an extension

 It's the last point that I don't understand.  How can their trade value be supressed and their free agency value be so high that resigning them isn't a potential part of the plan? 

My thoughts below the fold.

Continue reading this post »

Today's election day and so I look for a distraction to make it pass by a bit faster and naturally I turn to football. 

There are some thoughts that have been rolling round in my head and I thought I'd see if any people around here wanted to chat about them.  Don't be shy, I just thought it'd be fun to have a general discussion thread here.  Sure, John Morgan is the best football analyst anywhere, but sometimes the front page just isn't enough for me and I want to chat.  So in no particular order . . . . .

Continue reading this post »

I have recently realized something:  this site is freakin awesome!!

I don't mean this just as hyperbole or natural hometown pride.  I mean that this site is objectively better than the others.  Since this news is a recent discovery of mine I thought there might be other people here who don't realize exactly how lucky Seahawks fans are to have this place, hence this diary.

How did I make this realization?

Continue reading this post »

The real world debate rages between SA and MoMo but the question I have isn't about who Holmgren should use more but who he will use more: should I start MoMo or SA on my fantasy team?

I'm in a point per reception league, which really increase MoMo's value.

So will Holmgren use the 49er game as a chance to pound the ball with SA in a desperate attempt to fix the running game, or at least experiment with what is and isn't working?  Or will he continue to move toward a platooning system, maybe using a game the Seahawks should dominate as an excuse to see more of MoMo and Weaver and give SA some rest for his nagging injuries?

Advice?

I also offer up the comment space below for all fantasy questions from people seeking the collective genius of the Field Gulls readership.

After watching yesterday's game I was obviously pleased.  It was great to see the defense dominate, even if it wasn't exactly against the Patriots.

But at the end of the game I also thought "well, that John Morgan guy won't be able to slam Alexander after this game."

So I read the game summary and surprise, surprise . . .

Continue reading this post »

Ok, this isn't really a defense of these two players per se as much as it is my own mental justification as to why they continued to receive playing time as starters while struggling.

I am not trying to pick a fight here, I would like to offer some potential reasoning and hear what you think.  To be fair I haven't really heard this reasoning from McClaren or anyone else, so I'm probably just trying to justify Mariners actions in my own mind, so be it.

Okay, here's the theory:

Continue reading this post »