Balls & Strikes

With the start of Spring Training games, we also get the start of MLB's experimenting with the automated balls & strikes system.  This is something that we all saw coming, especially after it was successfully tried out in the Minor Leagues.  It won't be used in the regular season, but that's probably coming as well, perhaps as early as 2026.  (Although, I'd imagine it might wait until 2027 since the current CBA expires after next season and that way they can work it into the negotiations.)

Minor League testing revealed that success rate on challenges was roughly 50 percent, and there was an average of 3-4 challenges per game.  Using those numbers as their baseline, MLB determined that two challenges per team was an appropriate number (with challenges retained if they're successful).  And only the pitcher, catcher or hitter can request a challenge...with no consultation from the dugout.  That's a huge point.  Because with teams only having two challenges available to them, it's up to the players to decide if it's the right moment to use one.

It didn't take long to get the first ball/strike challenge, either!  Cubs pitcher Cody Poteet successfully challenged a ball call in the first inning against the Dodgers on Thursday.  The replay was shown on the stadium scoreboard and took almost no time at all, so it really shouldn't affect the pace of play very much.  It'll probably take even less time than instant replay challenges, which can sometimes take minutes!

Since this is brand new, there will obviously be a bit of an adjustment period early in Spring Training, just as there was when instant replay and the pace of play initiatives were introduced.  And, since it's been used in the Minor Leagues for the past few seasons, the younger players will be more familiar with it than Major League veterans.  As a result, Reds manager Terry Francona has encouraged his veterans not to challenge balls & strikes during Spring Training.  We'll see how long that lasts!

Much like with instant replay, the ABS challenge system seems to be the best compromise.  Some people ("fans" mainly) will always want so-called "robot" umpires calling every pitch.  That system is far from perfect, though, and those who've seen it in action, especially the players, don't want it.  It would eliminate the art of pitch framing that many catchers have mastered.  It would also eliminate the human element of the home plate umpire calling balls & strikes.  Which some may argue is a good thing, but has also been a part of baseball since the beginning and most people don't want to lose.

"Robot" umpires wouldn't eliminate the need for a home plate umpire, either, which some people don't seem to understand.  There'll still be plays at the plate that require a safe or out call.  You'll still need someone to determine if the batter got hit by the pitch or if there's a check swing or foul tip.  Or if there was catcher's interference.  So, the home plate umpire's not going away regardless.

There's also a flaw in going to a fully ABS system that the Minor and Independent League trials have revealed.  Sometimes the ABS calls a pitch a ball or strike when it actually wasn't.  The system only registers whether the ball passes through the strike zone when it crosses the plate.  It doesn't account for bouncing in front of the plate first or other things like that.  In those cases, the home plate umpire can overrule the ABS.

So, going completely to the ABS doesn't seem like it'll ever be a viable option.  The system is far too imperfect for that.  And the human element of umpiring is still needed for all those judgment decisions.  But, umpires are people and people make mistakes.  So, in the interest of getting it right, using the ABS with a challenge system is the way to go.

And, as we've seen with instant replay, the umpires want to get it right, too.  So, if a challenge system helps them get the call right, they're all for it.  And some missed calls are more impactful than others.  Is there much of a difference between a 1-1 and a 2-0 count with the bases empty in the first inning?  No.  The difference between 1-1 and 0-2 with the tying run on third and two out in the eighth, though?  Different story.  That can be massive!

That's where the strategy element comes in.  Especially since it's being left up to the players (at least for now).  They have to decide when's the right time to use it.  And they'd better be right.  Because the last thing you want is to waste challenges and not have any left when you really need one.  So, yes, the players need to be aware of the situation and not just challenge for the sake of challenging (which we see in tennis far too often).

Only giving teams two (unsuccessful) challenges apiece is an important detail, too.  It was never going to be unlimited.  Then you'd have somebody questioning every borderline pitch and games would take forever!  They tried three challenges each and found that to be too many.  So, two it is.  Which seems reasonable and makes sense seeing as that's also the number of instant replay challenges teams get per game.

Instant replay has been tremendous for Major League Baseball.  The ABS system is essentially just the ball/strike version of instant replay.  And, with a roughly 50/50 success rate, the players will find out that the umpire is right half the time.  That may end up causing them to rethink their understanding of the strike zone.  At the very least, it might encourage them to limit the use of challenges to pitches that were glaringly missed instead of the borderline ones that could've gone either way.

This Spring Training trial run is simply that.  A trial.  This isn't like the recent rule changes where Spring Training was used for players to get accustomed to them.  So, it'll be very interesting to see how the ABS challenge system is received and how MLB chooses to move forward.  Full implementation (using the challenge system) seems likely.  It's really just a question of when.

What I hope the end result is, though, is something else entirely.  Hopefully it makes people understand how difficult a job umpiring is and gain a greater appreciation of the profession.  Because umpires don't set out to get calls wrong or "screw" teams.  They were all for instant replay as a tool that can help them get calls right, which is all they want.  Same thing with automated balls & strikes.  It's a tool.  A helpful tool.  And if it can help them get it right, they're all for it, too.