[ctorg]

Anything that would remove the subjective bias of umpires is good, IMO. The idea is to make as accurate a call as possible, to not have human error. The idea of human error being involved in judging the game means it's a flawed game and the results are illegitimate and subjective.

Umpires are supposed to be impartial and objective. If there is a system that can accomplish their job better than they can, I'm all for it. If there's a tool that can help them make more accurate calls, I'm for that, too. Computerize the strike zone calls, give instant replays, etc.

As far as getting a system to work right, well, that could take some work. But the idea of human error being part of the game is, to me (no offense meant to anyone) pointless sentimentality for a time when there were no other options. It's like relying on scouts to judge amateur players by watching them and ignoring newer, possibly better tools to judge players. Sure, it's the way the game has been, but there's a better way that it could be.