For people who have watched college baseball the past three seasons...

Matt13 - I've attended my share of mostly mid-level D1 college games over the last 3 years from Ivy, CAA, A10, Conference USA, and ACC.  The strike zone has been mostly predictable with some two strike leniency - two fists on mostly the outside corner and a single fist on the inside corner.   Very rarely do you see anything called above the belt and there is a little more wiggle room below the knees depending on the pitch.  Since the strike zone is three dimensional.....the curveball remains the toughest pitch to call for them and that gets the most hitters/coaches hot when they are called out looking especially on the inside corner.  Again, just my observations.

One thing I have seen more frequently is an umpire willing to call batters back after leaning into the strike zone in an attempt to coax a hit by pitch.  This is a good trend IMHO.  Rather than have the hitter called back, I'd like to see the hitter called out....but that is me.

By the way, umpires don't "suck" (your reference above...I know you are kidding) but you guys do have a thick skin and a love for the game.  All of my sons have umpired and it was a great learning experience for them.  I encourage younger players to try it out, and see what it looks and feels like behind the plate.

I would agree with Fenway's post.  For the most part the ball/strike calls are pretty much what you'd expect with the exception of the occasional outlier umpire.  My personal criteria for sound ball/strike umpiring is consistency.  I don't mean one team vs. the other, I mean consistency through the course of the game.  If you're calling the low strike early in the game, then you need to be calling it late in the game - and vice-versa.  I start to shake my head when there is a perceptible shift in strike calls as the game progresses. 

I would add this however - the umpiring in my son's collegiate summer league last year was awful.  Regularly inconsistent through the course of the game and inconsistent by the same plate umpire one time you saw him to the next.  It was really noticeable.  The other thing that drives me crazy is when umpires think they are part of the show and inject themselves into the play - the best games are the ones where the umpires are invisible. 

I watch a lot of College Baseball on t.v., especially this time of year.  In most games I rarely notice the home plate umpire.

When we get guys calling our HS games that also call college games, it is a noticeable difference.  Generally, they are far more consistent, which is great.  I concur with Fenway - they rarely call above the belt, which is sometimes not so great.  Their zones tend to be tighter than the average HS guys, which is understandable/to be expected.  

College - my observations over the last three years (granted, not a huge sample size) - I actually think they have gotten better at NOT calling the pitches too far off the outside corner when that is where the catcher's target is - using Fenway's language, maybe one fist now instead of two or two instead of three.  I also agree that they are doing a better job with keeping batters in the box on HBP with batters moving to the pitch.

Also college level - I understand that the zone is, on one hand, clearly defined but, on the other hand, actually called differently.  I just wish there was more consensus across the country on what will actually be called, particularly the top of the zone.  It seems that some will call anything just below the letters, some will not call above the belt or belly button - about a 4-6" disparity.

Funny you should bring this up now as last weekend was really the first time we've had what I consider to be a bad umpire in the year and a half my son has been a D1 pitcher.  Keep in mind, I normally sit out the right field line, so my view of the strike zone is basically the up and down portion...can't tell inside/outside from out there unless the catcher really has to reach for one.  That being said, the umpire last weekend had a zone that went from 4-5" off the dirt to right at the numbers.  I'm only talking fast balls, because again, it's hard to see anything else from where we were.  Started out calling the low strike....but stayed consistent...which is fine, but eventually went to calling it both ways...high and low....thoroughly frustrating both teams.  My son tends to keep it low so he was fine with it for the 2 innings he pitched, but said the batters had no idea what to swing/not swing at. 

Other than that, it's been pretty good.  A couple times I questioned my son about a couple calls when he was on the mound and he said "nope, it was good".   We came from an area that had it's share of really bad HS umpires...and it seemed like we always had the same 2 guys.  The umpires we've had since he's gotten to college have been a welcome relief.  Keep up the good work.....I can't imagine it's the most enjoyable job in the world at times.  Coaches, players, parents.....seen it all....wouldn't want to be in your shoes.

I will pretty much echo what has been said already.  The one constant that I have seen is that the high strike does not exist.  I haven't seen a single umpire consistently call the belt high strike.  Overall the umpiring has been pretty good.  Better than what I remember from last year.  This year I have only seen 2 or 3 umpires that were noticeably inconsistent with their zone.

We're season ticket holders at the University of Miami.  I'd call it top level college play (well, okay not this season but typically).

I don't think I have really noticed anything different in the zone.  Usually it is a little more generous on the low end, and maybe a little expanded side to side.  It's really only annoying when it's not consistent. Fortunately that isn't too frequent.  There are a couple of guys that I recognize immediately because I think they don't call a good game. Since each crew probably only works a couple of series a season it takes a lot for one umpire to make enough of an impression for me to remember him.

For those who have never seen it, the first couple of rows at UM are actually below field level, so your eyes are basically at the level of the players feet.  It's a real interesting perspective to see the strike zone from. 

I live in Big Ten country but mostly watch SEC Baseball.  It is a more entertaining game, to me.  The umpiring seems pretty consistent.

I'm planning on attending several D3 games in the next few weeks,  will report back if I see a difference.

I watch a lot of college baseball and I have to say it has been much better over the past few seasons than it used to be. Bad home plate calls do happen, but when its consistant for both sides its fine. 

Some calls on the bases have been questionable but in D2 there are only 2 umpires and these guys do work back to back games, not easy.

A lot of good stuff so far...thanks so much. I have some thoughts on what's been said, but I have one of the aforementioned D2 2-man DHs tomorrow and it's a little bit of a drive. I'll chime in tomorrow night, time permitting.

I watched IU/Nebraska on the BG10 network last night and the ump called the game along the lines mentioned here with one exception. He had no problem calling a strike above the belt. Also the players had no hesitation going after the high FB. 

Gettig back to the d2 double headers, I find the game much differently played when there are 2 nine inning games in a row. Hitters take more swings and less 3-2 counts. The games have to move much quicker. Its a long day, but I dont mind it.

I attended a D3 game this afternoon and thought the home plate ump did a good job.  The base ump got yelled at from both dugouts on different bang bang plays but they were close enough that as an impartial observer I couldn't find fault.

On a side note, D3 ball is fun to watch!  A lot of good players, great seats, a fun atmosphere and the game moved quickly.  

Went and watched IU/Neb this afternoon. This ump was worse than the one last night with the high FB. Almost armpit. Not every time, but enough he had both sets of fans on him. He deserved it, was pretty inconsistent.

Watched son's games via video stream today.  Second game - poor quality video but I could figure things out pretty quickly.  Both teams relative free swingers.  Right from the beginning and all the way through to the end, TONS of K's looking.  Toward the end, players swinging at 2 strike pitches well out of the zone.  Players leave the box looking totally frustrated and perplexed.  Got the call later... plate ump was calling outside strikes well into the batters box.  Hitters took more of the plate... zone just got even further out.  Both coaches just shaking their heads.  Starting P couldn't believe the calls he was getting.  He kept going further and further out and there seemed to be no limit.  This was NAIA, second of two sevens.  Definitely not the norm.

This year I've been (oh so) fortunate to watch quite a few D1 JUCO games (tongue is firmly planted in the cheek) in the NC/SC area. Some are D1 v. D1 and others are D1 v. D2 (not enough D1 teams close by). The strike zones have varied, but a general truism is P's get the low strike (below the knees) consistently. Things at the belt in the zone many times land outside the park. P's tend to get fairly generous width on outer half with more strict inner half. I've also had the pleasure of watching D2 baseball in the prior 2 years with much the same type of zone. If a P misses there, balls travel *much* further and faster beyond the OF fence. For the most part, the umpires are more patient to see the curves cut in or not. There's a renewed focus to not allow freezing the ball to take an HBP - saw one yesterday that got called back.  Before that I had 4 years of D3 to enjoy watching in PA - there it really was dependent upon where you played to what the level of umpiring was - still basically true regarding the zone though - although perhaps a bit more at the top end and less patience on the curves. Basically what I'd expect given the levels. The one thing at D3 I found was hitters weren't as deep or patient as the D2 hitters. Again, it's what I'd expect given the level of ball.

The one thing for all these games that drives me crazy is how long they take. Makes me wonder a bit if the zone is opened up a bit more at the top end would the game go faster. It's worked for me as an umpire at lower JV/V type baseball games. It's tough to sit for 2-3 hours for a 7 inning contest with a lot of walks. Since neither D2 nor D1/D2 JUCO have the "top tier" pitchers, the hitters are generally patient enough to wait for their pitch. The result is either walks or hits, lots of baserunners, and well eventually pitching changes to the next tier down of pitchers. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. At D3, the 9 inning games were usually done in 2:30-2:45 which is about what I'd expect. Still when there's really good pitching from both sides it's 1:30-1:45 for 7 innings and 2:00-2:15 for 9 innings - now *those* are great games to watch unless you're a hitters parent!

Ok, after hobbling through my DH yesterday after dropping my gear bag on my foot heading out to it, and a late-night trip to urgent care, here's my thoughts on some of the stuff brought up...

1. HBP: this has been an active issue that the NCAA has been trying to clean up. The rule changed a few years ago from awarding the batter first as long as the pitch was in the box and he did not intentionally move to get hit (there was no requirement to move out of the way.) When the rule changed, there was still some grey area when it came to pitches where the batter didn't move. Now, as a point of emphasis, we are to keep the batter at home when he permits the pitch to hit him. That's the biggest reason you're seeing that increase.

2. Strike zone: I think we are at the point where we (as a baseball culture) are going to be torn between what is "expected" and "consistency" vs. expanding the called zone upward and tighter over the plate. I had an absolutely too-small zone my second plate of the year, both up and down, but it was consistent and got very few complaints. I was not happy with that, as it was going against what we are being told to call this year. My third plate, I was getting the high strike, but not the low one, and it frustrated everyone (to include myself) because it put pitchers at a disadvantage (although not noticeably so during that game.) 

This brings us to the issue I was hoping that the folks here would bring up, and you didn't disappoint--mostly what should be called high or outside. We are getting a lot of pressure to clean up the outside strike and bring it in--that's never been a problem for me, as I do a lot of wood-bat in the summer, but apparently there is a sizable portion of umpires who are still giving too much outside. The problem often lies in that outside pitches look good to everyone else in the stadium except for the catcher, and he's not going to complain if he gets that call. Thus, there's an immediate expectation on an outside pitch that it would be called a strike. When I don't give that pitch, I do hear it for a couple of innings.

The high strike is a beast all its own, and I think it's because it's the least-defined boundary of the zone, as well as the one that is most impacted by breaking balls. Everyone has an idea of where the top of the zone should be, but a batter in a stance makes it a bit difficult to delineate exactly where that line is. If we aren't getting a strike above the belt, we aren't doing our jobs...but a lot of strikes above the belt also cross just below the letters as the batter leans forward, so it looks higher than it is. If we want to get that strike consistently from batter to batter, game to game, and season to season, everyone is going to need to understand that is what the high strike looks like from either dugout, and expect some pain as it is called more and more. The amount of pain is going to be regionally-dependent, too, as over time, each conference has developed their informal expectations through socialization (i.e. what the participants are willing to accept as a zone vs. what umpires are instructed to call, and so on and so on over time.) I think that right there is the biggest reason why there are different ideas on what a strike should be based on whether you're a fan, coach, pitcher, batter, etc. and where you are.

Prior to the season, I watched the NCAA Rules Video in which they covered several points of emphasis.  One of which was the HBP.  I don't agree with the way they are supposed to call it now.  If a batter gets hit in the box, he should be awarded first base.  

Here is the link to the video.     https://vimeo.com/196971472

My son (a pitcher) would like to see a couple of things. 1) The high strike called. 2) In and out called on the edges, i.e., the inside pitch called on the black.  Doesn't ask for extra room away.

I often wonder how much an umpire is swayed by whatever position he played when he was still playing.  Does the guy who was a hitter shrink up the zone because he likes hitting?  Does the guy who pitched expand more because he has an affinity for pitchers?  Just like in journalism, everyone has biases, right?

Since my son is a pitcher, if I were an ump, I would pretty definitely be sure to call the edges and corners.  20 years ago, if I were an ump, in keeping with my past positional play, I would have had a tight hitter's zone.

Just commit to calling the high strike and let the folks deal with it.  They already know that the pitch at the letters is supposed to be a strike and that they have been "getting away" with something for a while.   If it is below the batter's hands, ring him up.

As more and more programs install and employ sophisticated electronic equipment to track and measure a number of variables, their understanding of umpires' strike zones is improving materially. A couple of weekends ago, I was visiting my son's school where they use Trackman equipment. He told me as an aside that they've confirmed what they've always felt they knew, generally; that the college strike zone was wide and low. If I were you, I'd consider reaching out to his and others' programs that can give you some very precise insight. 

I was a catcher as a player, and initially I often wondered how that experience colored the way I saw the strike zone. As most umpires back then had to work their way up to higher ball, through the youth leagues, I started with a "hittable pitch" philosophy that kept me level appropriate, consistent and with the least gross misses.

As a catcher I felt I saw the strike zone pretty well. My Dad was a great ball player and his advice was to hit the “hittable pitch”…because the level of pitching wasn’t great. I remember thinking “how could you not swing at that one?

As an Umpire when the level of play increased, refining my strike zone became my goal. The “Hittable pitch” pitch philosophy still served me well, but I needed to improve as the pitcher excelled. 

This is when my catching experience ceased to have any real influence in my umpire career.

 I spend a good deal of time and money at clinics working on my plate work. A “Good Ball and Strike Guy” is high praise in our community. I am known as an inside and low ball umpire. I know this from video tape of my cage work at umpire clinics. I am more apt to call a ball a strike inside and low than I am at the outside and high side of the zone. 

It’s just my reality...maybe it’s because I am shorter that I see that lower ball as a strike. Don’t know, not sure what I can do as a human to improve on that. I try and keep as consistent a zone as possible to avoid problems, but it is what it is. 

Calling a good strike zone is where an umpire makes his reputation and it is something I work hard on.........Despite all our efforts, I feel there will always be some variance.......but I will try to get better......if at any time I feel I am doing "good enough" and fail to work on refining my game......I will call it a career.......

PS. 

D3 Non-Conference double header and the home team is down 11-0 after 2 innings of the first game. The Head coach comes out and says “I’m not wasting any more pitching on this game”, Get it over fast so we can get to the second game. Got me?” Then he proceeds to go to his bench and says to the team, “Go up there swinging boys”….

The “Hittable pitch” philosophy can still be useful.