MLB's ABS System used during spring

[Deja Doh]

The automated ball strike (ABS) challenge system will be in play for about half of the games in spring.  2 challenges per team.  I don't like it.  What happens if an ump is consistent throughout a game with a strike zone, but maybe shifted 1/2 inch, it seems strange that a challenge late in a game could undo that.  To me, the video challenge system is for tech and stat  freaks, more than an improvement to the game.

[Bellhorn04]

A 2 challenge system is a heck of a lot better than nothing.  And successful challenges don't reduce your number, so you could actually challenge 5 times or whatever as long as you're right.

Teams can be expected to save their challenges for higher leverage situations.

I think this is what we'll end up getting as a permanent system.     

[jad]

29 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

A 2 challenge system is a heck of a lot better than nothing.  And successful challenges don't reduce your number, so you could actually challenge 5 times or whatever as long as you're right.

Teams can be expected to save their challenges for higher leverage situations.

I think this is what we'll end up getting as a permanent system.     

Disagree.  It's WAY worse than nothing.  Those 'challenges' are a huge waste of time.  If you are going to use the automatic system for challenges, USE IT ALL THE TIME.   Why introduce mock drama (should he risk using the challenge now?...).   Also, MLB judges umpires on the way they conform to the electronic strike zone.  So what's the point of not using it all the time?  Tennis improved DRAMATICALLY with automatic line calls.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

At Worcester last year, I saw two times when called strike challenges were made -- one by Grissom, one by Yorke -- with each overturned in the batter's favor.

In both instances, a count of 1 and 2 reversed to a count of 2 and 1. Everybody should be able to see the dramatic differences in those at bats... On the next pitch, both batters singled.

[Bellhorn04]

12 minutes ago, jad said:

Disagree.  It's WAY worse than nothing.  Those 'challenges' are a huge waste of time.  If you are going to use the automatic system for challenges, USE IT ALL THE TIME.   Why introduce mock drama (should he risk using the challenge now?...).   Also, MLB judges umpires on the way they conform to the electronic strike zone.  So what's the point of not using it all the time?  Tennis improved DRAMATICALLY with automatic line calls.

I'd be fine with totally automated calls.  But I wholeheartedly disagree that this isn't a step in the right direction.   

[Hugh2]

24 minutes ago, jad said:

Disagree.  It's WAY worse than nothing.  Those 'challenges' are a huge waste of time.  If you are going to use the automatic system for challenges, USE IT ALL THE TIME.   Why introduce mock drama (should he risk using the challenge now?...).   Also, MLB judges umpires on the way they conform to the electronic strike zone.  So what's the point of not using it all the time?  Tennis improved DRAMATICALLY with automatic line calls.

Games would go back to 4 hours long if they had unlimited challenges. Games would be unwatchable 

[Bellhorn04]

5 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Games would go back to 4 hours long if they had unlimited challenges. Games would be unwatchable 

I think the idea of the full robo system is that there would be no challenges, because every call would be automated.  The ump would get a signal in his earpiece indicating ball or strike and would simply relay it.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'd be ok with the challenge system if they compromise and get rid of the constant check-the-check appeals.

Just entirely get rid of the totally subjective concept of asking another ump 90 feet away from the batter whether he "went around" -- which, in my lifetime has evolved from a batter actually "breaking his wrists" (turning his top hand over) to a guy flinching the barrel of his bat about an inch off his shoulder. 

[jad]

26 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Games would go back to 4 hours long if they had unlimited challenges. Games would be unwatchable 

Ah, I see I wasn't clear. I meant " use ABS all the time" (no challenges), not allow unlimited challenges.  (I actually hate any replay system; make the call--by humans or in this case automatically--and play the game.  I realize with today's betting establishment, this is a pipe dream.)

[Hugh2]

14 minutes ago, jad said:

Ah, I see I wasn't clear. I meant " use ABS all the time" (no challenges), not allow unlimited challenges.  (I actually hate any replay system; make the call--by humans or in this case automatically--and play the game.  I realize with today's betting establishment, this is a pipe dream.)

That makes more sense

[Jasonbay44]

As someone whose had to watch CB Bucknor, Angel Hernandez, Joe West and other *******s try to be the center of attention and make s***** calls consistently and not get held accountable, I like the system/idea. The challenge process is very quick and has to be done immediately by the better or catcher, so it doesn’t delay the game a whole lot. 

[moonslav59]

7 hours ago, jad said:

Disagree.  It's WAY worse than nothing.  Those 'challenges' are a huge waste of time.  If you are going to use the automatic system for challenges, USE IT ALL THE TIME.   Why introduce mock drama (should he risk using the challenge now?...).   Also, MLB judges umpires on the way they conform to the electronic strike zone.  So what's the point of not using it all the time?  Tennis improved DRAMATICALLY with automatic line calls.

I totally agree. No challenges: just have the robo ump call it from the start.

[jad]

3 hours ago, Jasonbay44 said:

As someone whose had to watch CB Bucknor, Angel Hernandez, Joe West and other *******s try to be the center of attention and make s***** calls consistently and not get held accountable, I like the system/idea. The challenge process is very quick and has to be done immediately by the better or catcher, so it doesn’t delay the game a whole lot. 

But the point is not to 'hold umps accountable' (i.e., punish umpires); that will not make the calls better.  The point is to get the RIGHT calls, and the way to do that is to use ABS.  I really cannot see ANY reasonable argument against it.  (Unless, as noted above, fans enjoy seeing people punished; same fans, I suppose, who would LOVE to see, say, Devers ' held accountable' by being benched).   Personally, I'd rather see the correct b/st calls made; I have no interest in the idiotic faux-drama of using challenges.

[moonslav59]

I just wish they'd start in 2025 not 2026.

[Duran Is The Man]

have any of you people even seen this in action? i've seen a number of AAA games where ABS was used and the amount of time it takes to review a call is insignificant -in fact, it's almost instantaneous. and it is nothing life the NFL if that's what you're thinking. i think it's great for the game and should be used throughout MLB and the minors.

Joe West and Angel Hernandez aside, most MLB umps are really good. AAA umps not as good and AA umps can downright horrible. do you have any idea what this does to a kids psyche? i've seen pitcher and hitters confidence completely shattered by inconsistent strike zones. the ABS will allow more consistency throughout all of baseball. i can't wait.

[moonslav59]

10 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

have any of you people even seen this in action? i've seen a number of AAA games where ABS was used and the amount of time it takes to review a call is insignificant -in fact, it's almost instantaneous. and it is nothing life the NFL if that's what you're thinking. i think it's great for the game and should be used throughout MLB and the minors.

Joe West and Angel Hernandez aside, most MLB umps are really good. AAA umps not as good and AA umps can downright horrible. do you have any idea what this does to a kids psyche? i've seen pitcher and hitters confidence completely shattered by inconsistent strike zones. the ABS will allow more consistency throughout all of baseball. i can't wait.

The challenge idea is better than nothing, but just have the call be made every pitch by ABS. The call can be sent to the home ump's ear piece, so he still makes the call, just like the olden days.

[Jasonbay44]

1 hour ago, jad said:

But the point is not to 'hold umps accountable' (i.e., punish umpires); that will not make the calls better.  The point is to get the RIGHT calls, and the way to do that is to use ABS.  I really cannot see ANY reasonable argument against it.  (Unless, as noted above, fans enjoy seeing people punished; same fans, I suppose, who would LOVE to see, say, Devers ' held accountable' by being benched).   Personally, I'd rather see the correct b/st calls made; I have no interest in the idiotic faux-drama of using challenges.

The umpires have a strong union and aren’t going to go down without a long/annoying fight. I think This is the first step of getting us towards that but they aren’t going to just get rid of umps completely yet. It’s going to take time to get people to be fully on board with this. 

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, Jasonbay44 said:

The umpires have a strong union and aren’t going to go down without a long/annoying fight. I think This is the first step of getting us towards that but they aren’t going to just get rid of umps completely yet. It’s going to take time to get people to be fully on board with this. 

No umps will lose their jobs over this- not an issue.

[Duran Is The Man]

8 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

The challenge idea is better than nothing, but just have the call be made every pitch by ABS. The call can be sent to the home ump's ear piece, so he still makes the call, just like the olden days.

that would be fine with me. 

[Jasonbay44]

5 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

No umps will lose their jobs over this- not an issue.

They really don’t want automated strike zones though and it could eventually lead to them losing their jobs. 

[moonslav59]

30 minutes ago, Jasonbay44 said:

They really don’t want automated strike zones though and it could eventually lead to them losing their jobs. 

Why? We'd still need an ump behind the plate.

I'd be fine with a contract w umps guaranteeing no loss of jobs for 50 years

 

[dgalehouse]

You would be taking away the umpire's main job, main function.  Would you then still pay them the same money ? 

[moonslav59]

18 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

You would be taking away the umpire's main job, main function.  Would you then still pay them the same money ? 

Still need a home plate ump. all the other umps remain unchanged.

So, one umps duties are reduced significantly, it doesnt mean he's out a job. Let em complain. We've been complaining about them for over a century. Let them see what it feels like.

[Jasonbay44]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Why? We'd still need an ump behind the plate.

I'd be fine with a contract w umps guaranteeing no loss of jobs for 50 years

 

Yes but it would make the job so easy to the point where any random person could do it. We probably also wouldn’t need 4 umpires anymore. That is why they are against it. 

[Bellhorn04]

7 hours ago, Jasonbay44 said:

Yes but it would make the job so easy to the point where any random person could do it. We probably also wouldn’t need 4 umpires anymore. That is why they are against it. 

Right, you're explaining it well.

[Duran Is The Man]

8 hours ago, Jasonbay44 said:

Yes but it would make the job so easy to the point where any random person could do it. We probably also wouldn’t need 4 umpires anymore. That is why they are against it. 

they'd still have to call plays at the plate when a runner is trying to score, but yeah, pretty easy up to that.

[mvp 78]

23 hours ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

At Worcester last year, I saw two times when called strike challenges were made -- one by Grissom, one by Yorke -- with each overturned in the batter's favor.

In both instances, a count of 1 and 2 reversed to a count of 2 and 1. Everybody should be able to see the dramatic differences in those at bats... On the next pitch, both batters singled.

It may be awkward right now in Spring Training, but it worked really well from what I saw in AAA last season. Meidroth had a few challenges when I watched and it went really quick. If it takes away the k zone from my screen, I'm all for it. 

[mvp 78]

12 hours ago, Jasonbay44 said:

They really don’t want automated strike zones though and it could eventually lead to them losing their jobs. 

No, because they still need to call plays at the plate, foul tips, check swings, etc. 

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Duran Is The Man said:

they'd still have to call plays at the plate when a runner is trying to score, but yeah, pretty easy up to that.

So, the job gets easier, so they pay them less? I doubt it.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

It may be awkward right now in Spring Training, but it worked really well from what I saw in AAA last season. Meidroth had a few challenges when I watched and it went really quick. If it takes away the k zone from my screen, I'm all for it. 

The BOX? That stupid outline that is the exact same size whether the batter is Altuve or Judge? The square that doesn't align with the exact same angle of every centerfield camera at every single ballpark, just to confuse and frustrate viewers beholden to this age of misinformation? The box that is only 2-dimensional and doesn't reflect the depth of a pitch when it actually crosses the plate and/or lands in a catcher's mitt?

How would anyone ever watch baseball again without it?

Consider this: has anyone, at any time in their lives, ever witnessed a spectator at a live ballgame at any level holding a cutout cardboard rectangle in front of their eyes so they could replicate the living room experience?