jah003 said:

---

1. Giving this to the coaches seems weird. It's not like they have the best angle.
2. If you get a challenge right do you get it back like the MLB? I'd say an average college umpire gets maybe 25-30 ball/strike calls wrong a game. Unless it's Jeff Head and then it's infinity.

---

Probably smart to give the coaches the challenge so they can use them more strategically. Guessing the players will just signal to the coach that they should challenge and then coach will decide whether or not to challenge.

I'm guessing you don't get the challenges back, as you alluded to it might be too many calls if they did.

NiagraSpews2014 said:

---

There is a second tweet from Kendall explaining:
3 challenges, win the challenge and keep it.
Gain 1 in extras of you are out of challenges
Pitcher, batter, catcher, coach can challenge

---

Damn. Gonna be a lot of challenges then. In college there is a decent chance the call is wrong.

Games are gonna last 5 hours with all of the wrong calls getting reversed. Given the quality level of the SEC umpires, every team will ultimately have unlimited challenges.

And I agree...gonna be LOTS of walks if hitters are willing to be patient. Although I suspect they will program the strike zones to be a little larger than the MLB zones.

Is this the stuff they are installing on the outfield lighting structures? They are triangulating the pitch now?

If it rids the game of panty-wastes like blue who was calling a super low strike-zone all weekend, Im for it, but this isn't very baseball, baby.

dabo man said:

---

If it's like MLB, the catchers are right the highest percentage of the time.

Also if it's like MLB, get ready for a smaller strike zone and more walks.

---

Yep. It shrinks the strike zone significantly. It actually shrinks it smaller than the rule book.

I will be a fan of ABS when it actually covers the entire plate. Until then, not a fan.

For as bad as college umps are with missed calls, college players can be just as bad at knowing the zone. I think they'll lose more challenges than yall are expecting.

They absolutely need some rules to shorten the game before this is fully implemented. Easy one I can think of is a batter minimum for relief pitchers.

Most umps do a decent job but when everything is hanging on a questionable pitch, we need ABS.

Aggie_Fire said:

---

I am amazed how some people would rather a shorter game with bad calls, instead of a slightly longer game with correct calls.

Make it make sense.

Baseball is a black and white game. Get out of the gray area, the umps are not good and we all know it. This will end the debates about getting "lucky calls", etc.

---

Except ABS is not 'correct calls.' It cuts off the entire front of the plate.

It's just consistent.

agsalaska said:

---

Aggie_Fire said:

---

I am amazed how some people would rather a shorter game with bad calls, instead of a slightly longer game with correct calls.

Make it make sense.

Baseball is a black and white game. Get out of the gray area, the umps are not good and we all know it. This will end the debates about getting "lucky calls", etc.

---

Except ABS is not 'correct calls.' It cuts off the entire front of the plate.

It's just consistent.

---

And back of the plate.

Also not sure people are saying they'd rather a shorter game with bad calls.....

agsalaska said:

---

Aggie_Fire said:

---

I am amazed how some people would rather a shorter game with bad calls, instead of a slightly longer game with correct calls.

Make it make sense.

Baseball is a black and white game. Get out of the gray area, the umps are not good and we all know it. This will end the debates about getting "lucky calls", etc.

---

Except ABS is not 'correct calls.' It cuts off the entire front of the plate.

It's just consistent.

---

In MLB they are changing the rules to fit the ABS system. I like that change. Really hard to look at the ball in 3D but in 2D in the middle of the plate, it is very consistent which is good IMO.

No it isn't.
They're just lazy.

A minimum of 3 cameras gives the position of the ball in 3-d space. The plate doesn't move. The top and bottom of the zone would have to adjust for each batter, but they are known when the game starts.

More cameras means less error.

The NCAA rule book defines the strike zone as from the bottom of the kneecaps to the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants (kinda under the armpits). MLB defines it as between the knees and the midpoint of the torso, similar but a little smaller. However, watching MLB TV coverage it showed the superimposed ABS zone box from the knees to the belt. It will be interesting how this plays out, but most, I think, would just want consistency from the umpire. And if you think baseball umpiring is bad, watch some softball.

One day soon there will be robo umps that verify balls and strikes immediately. The job of the human ump behind the plate will then be to call the balls and strikes the robo ump signals to them. After this happens we will all look back with wonder and amazement about why we EVER had human umps calling pitches.

Charlie 31 said:

---

One day soon there will be robo umps that verify balls and strikes immediately. The job of the human ump behind the plate will then be to call the balls and strikes the robo ump signals to them. After this happens we will all look back with wonder and amazement about why we EVER had human umps calling pitches.

---

They already do this in AAA, and it is by far the preferred method for players. MLB should have just cut the cord and gone straight to it instead of the challenge system.

tcow715 said:

---

Charlie 31 said:

---

One day soon there will be robo umps that verify balls and strikes immediately. The job of the human ump behind the plate will then be to call the balls and strikes the robo ump signals to them. After this happens we will all look back with wonder and amazement about why we EVER had human umps calling pitches.

---

They already do this in AAA, and it is by far the preferred method for players. MLB should have just cut the cord and gone straight to it instead of the challenge system.

---

I have zero problem with this as soon as the technology matches the actual strike zone. I am very much against shrinking the zone or changing the rule book because they will not invest in the cameras needed to do it correctly.

Just fyi- we are going down the road professional tennis went:

Step 1: Human officials with call challenges (even though the bots know every single call- it's just a game on when to challenge or not)..

Step 2: Bots make calls immediately. For tennis, they still have recording of human voice calling it. In baseball, I imagine the umpire will be told ball or strike in his ear and he will deliver the call. For bases/plays at plate, probably retain the challenge system.

My problem with doing the challenge system for balls/strikes is the players or managers even should NOT have to be experts on when to challenge a pitch. Being good at picking when to do that shouldn't be part of the game imo.

Aston04 said:

---

Just fyi- we are going down the road professional tennis went:

Step 1: Human officials with call challenges (even though the bots know every single call- it's just a game on when to challenge or not)..

Step 2: Bots make calls immediately. For tennis, they still have recording of human voice calling it. In baseball, I imagine the umpire will be told ball or strike in his ear and he will deliver the call. For bases/plays at plate, probably retain the challenge system.

My problem with doing the challenge system for balls/strikes is the players or managers even should haven't to be experts on when to challenge a pitch. Being good at picking when to do that shouldn't be part of the game imo.

---

The biggest complaint from the players is having to learn two strike zones, the ABS zone and the Umpire's zone.