7:33pm: Major League Baseball’s Joint Competition Committee voted 9-2 to approve the ABS challenge system, Bob Nightengale of USA Today reports. All six owners and three of the four players voted in favor of the change. One of the players and the lone umpire on the committee voted against.
12:52pm: As expected, the ABS challenge system has been approved, per an MLB announcement.
11:50am: Major League Baseball’s Joint Competition Committee will meet today to vote on the implementation of the Automated Ball-Strike system for the 2026 season, Joel Sherman of the New York Post reports. The 11-person committee — comprised of six owners, four players and one umpire — is expected to approve the ABS system for next year.
It’ll be a radical shift to the game’s identity — one that many fans feel is overdue but many others oppose with fervor. The strike zone will not be fully automated if and when the ABS system is approved. Rather, the challenge system that has been used in the minor leagues, during spring training and during this year’s All-Star Game will be in place.
Under the incoming ABS system, any pitcher, catcher or hitter will be able to tap his helmet or cap to signify his desire to challenge a ball or strike call from the home plate umpire. Teams are afforded two challenges per game but are only docked a challenge if it is unsuccessful. Once a team has two unsuccessful challenges, they’ll be out of challenges for the remainder of the game. In theory, there’s no limit to the number of successful challenges a team could go through in a game. Challenges must come immediately after a ball/strike call is made; the dugout cannot have the team’s replay coordinator review the pitch and call for a challenge 10 to 15 seconds after the pitch was delivered, for instance. The challenge result will be shown on the on the scoreboard immediately after a challenge is granted.
For many players, this system will be second-nature. The ABS system was first implemented in the low minors back in 2021. It’s been standard at the Triple-A level since 2022. More veteran players got their first taste of it during spring training 2025 and will have all of the 2026 spring schedule to acclimate to the changes. As with any notable change, there will be some hurdles and probably some hiccups in the adoption, but the league’s hope is surely that — much like the pitch clock and, to a lesser extent, instant replay — it will quickly become a fairly seamless integration.
Forget the challenge system, just fully automate it.
Better yet, why not just put a pitching machine on the mound? And why stop there? Just have AI simulate the games and we won’t need anyone on the field!
Disingenuous reply.
No, it was a perfectly sincere reply expressing an opinion with which you do not agree. Big difference.
BlueSkies: It’s fine to not want any automation of the strike zone (though I do disagree there), but what’s disingenuous is suggesting that replacing some aspect of the umpiring with an automated system is in any way tantamount to replacing the players themselves with machines.
Meow: I get your point — slippery slope arguments always rely on some exaggeration. Still I take the argument as being sincere. It isn’t difficult to find fans arguing for automating more and more of the game. Try right here in this discussion, in fact. The danger of the sport becoming unrecognizable is real.
An opinion that is illogical as it correlates things that are totally different in nature. The umpire was only ever there out of necessity.
BlueSkies_LA
No, it was a perfectly sincere reply
=====================
No, it wasn’t even remotely close to being a serious reply. Trying to equate having a machine play the game to having a machine confirm balls and strikes is utterly ridiculous.
Joe: Sincere and serious are different words and concepts. Sincerity means an honest expression of a feeling, in this case, a concern about creeping automation in the game. But as they say, once you can fake sincerity you’ve got it made.
Blue Skies.. ok, I get that. But I for one, am absolutely for the inarguable automated system. The egregious calls this season have been flat out indefensible. Beyond that, I do see how the game would be unrecognizable.
Ha.. I meant to say “don’t” see how the game would become unrecognizable?
I want a metal robot to stand behind the catcher so that batter have something physical to direct their complaints at. It can automatically detect and eject when someone says “mother f***er”
Why not AI based robot batters and fielders while we’re at at?
Hilarious.
Bartolo Cologne
It is time to use the technology
=========================
What’s next? Using a machine to tell B-ball players when the 24-seconds is up? We should just rely on refs counting ‘one Mississippi, two Mississippi…”.
If we have the technology to make things more accurate, then the idea of discarding the technology, in an effort to make things more inaccurate, is too far afield for me to even contemplate.
So you dont want accurate balls/strikes? Got it
the issue with that is that very close pitches especially at the top and bottom of the zone will get called incorrectly. You can always determine the width of the plate but the top and bottom change per batter. a challenge system lets the most egregious ones get changed while keeping it closer to the older game
No matter how unfair it may be, it won’t be as bad as the most incompetant humans calling it.
No, they have taken scans of each player and the strike zone adjusts depending on the batter. This is public knowledge
you will see them on broadcasts acknowledging that the top and bottom are imperfect as it can depend on your stance not just your height.
What you will see on broadcasts is minor league announcers thinking that the top and bottom are imperfect. The system has not been used in the major leagues, so we don’t know what broadcasters might say going forward.
The fact is that the system is so accurate, to within 2.5 mm, that they had to change how it reads strikes to be just the front of the plate. When it registered in 3D, completely unhittable pitches would tick the strike zone at the back of the plate after never crossing into the strike zone at any other point and that was creating competition issues.
It also measures the top and bottom of the zone in real time and perfectly according to the rules. Unfortunately, umpires do not. That is why we are getting this system in MLB for 2026.
Or terrible hitters being fooled by the pitch
While one can argue about how accurate the system is, it is undeniable that it is far more consistent than the umpires. Not only is each umpire inconsistent, but the differences in how different umpires calls balls and strikes makes it difficult to adjust.
I think the only reason they are using the challenge system is to mollify those who are opposed to a fully automatic system. And there are a lot of them: pitchers, catchers, umpires and fans resistant to change.
Or, from pitchers, catchers, fans, and umpires who don’t believe the game has been officiated the wrong way for 150 years. I mean, speaking of undeniable.
Ironically, you are doing the actual yelling here.
I completely understand the reference. What you aren’t getting is the irony of accusing others of being grouchy complainers when you are doing the actual grouchy complaining. Trust me, nobody’s BS actually smells sweeter than anyone else’s, and age doesn’t actually figure into it the way you assume it does. Those are the actual facts of the situation, of which I am seemingly more aware than you.
Irony: expressing meaning through the use of a contradiction or paradox.
Complaining about someone complaining is ironic.
But if you’d prefer hypocritical, we can go with that.
Completely on the contrary, and if you had done me the courtesy of reading my thoughts on this, you could have avoided the insults.
Congratulations! You can Google definitions. He is right, you are acting grumpy. He posted what is. Those are called facts. Only someone yelling at clouds disputes them. Maybe you can Google the definition of that too.
Pads, its accurate to within 2.5 mm or .0984 inches.
The challenge system is a good compromise. Just take the W.
You seem to have a knack for top comment of the day!
Good, about darn time.
Interesting timing, especially after last night’s ump show at Petco. Roberto Ortiz was BRUTAL.
Just looked up his scorecard from last night. 84% on called strikes—that is BRUTAL. You are correct!
It was absolutely horrific. Definitely one of the worst ump performances I’ve seen
Someone posted a compilation of all his bad calls on r/baseball on Reddit. It was a minute and a half
He got all except one of the borderline calls wrong. He got a few of the not borderline calls wrong too. The umpires are judged heavily on calls on pitches that are within a ball’s width inside or outside the strike zone or 2.86-2.94 inches. That is what I mean by borderline calls.
The thinking is that pitches 5-6 inches off the plate or down the middle are not hard to call. Its calls on the borderline pitches that make the difference between a good and a bad umpire. Ortiz was basically 0-fer on those.
Love this over fully automated. Best of both worlds. Natural flow of ump calling balls and strikes but still holds them accountable for blatant missed calls.
Totally agree. The challenges make things interesting too.
Why do you like this over fully automated? There’s two zones being called throughout the game then. There’s the automated zone and whatever the ump is calling. A borderline pitch could be called one way by the ump, but it’s incorrect by ABS but not egregious enough to risk losing a challenge, and then it’s called another way late on a challenge.
Teams could also lose challenges early, and we would still have to sit through the bad calls late in games.
This is a step in the right direction, but the real solution is a fully automated zone.
I mean if you were to go that far then you are basically replacing both the catcher and umpire and might as well just time steals and put a net behind the batter. this allows catchers to still have a value to framing pitches and keeps the rhythm of the game
You make these insane leaps of illogic.
How would a system that would still involve an umpire at home plate disturb the rhythm of the game?
bag o ballz, How do you replace the catcher, when their role is not only receiving the ball and making throws to 2B, but calling pitches, and blocking errant throws? Plus, the timed steals concept, assumes the throw would be accurate. Plenty of guys are safe even when the ball beats them, but was off the bag. Pop time is a big factor in catchers controlling the running game. How would that be computed? It makes zero sense to conflate the multifunctional role of the catcher with making the ball/strike calls accurate..
Angel Hernandez just announced he is sueing MLB to be the umpire on the newly formed committee. He filed the paperwork at a Lens Crafters in Manhattan.
Manhattan, Kansas. He couldn’t see his boarding pass correctly.
I don’t think that he was even the lowest rated umpire on ball/strike calls. Amazing, right
@Bill
CB Buckner was another that was spacially challenged when judging the vector of a ballistic.
This is a good thing. Having watched it for years in Triple-A, the players and fans will really like it, especially the graphics on the Video Boards. At this point, most of the MLB players have already seen its benefits in Triple-A.
It will show just how good the umpires can be when they want to be, and will limit the spiteful retaliation by umpires.
The only problem will be if a team runs out of the two challenges. Then, they’re fair game for the umpires.
I’d like to see the system go back to the original 3 challenges per team.,
P.S. – Never let a pitcher challenge. They’re awful at it, while the catchers and hitters are usually quite good.
Interesting point about a pitcher’s accuracy in challenging balls/strikes versus batters and catchers. I hadn’t thought of that. I’m sure someone in baseball is keeping track of those stats.
I agree. It’s a great idea, but 2 challenges feels slightly low.
But unlimited if you keep guessing correctly. Pretty fair imo.
C.J. Nitkowski on the Braves telecast tonight suggested five per team which makes more sense given the average missed calls per game. A former pitcher, he surprisingly suggested the challenges be limited to catcher and hitter which also makes more sense by about sixty feet.
I guess something has to be done. I may be in the minority on this, but it seems to me umps are making more and more bad calls.
There are also more cameras.
Omg no. Watch a game from the 90’s. Half of Greg Maddux’s K’s were called strikes on pitches an inch or two off the corner. He did that on purpose.
The challenge system is ridiculous when the purpose of the system is to get the calls as correct as possible. Why are the players also tasked with being umpires?
It also feels counter to Manfred’s obsession with speeding up the pace of the game.
It’s not, though. The process is very quick, unlike video replay challenges.
It completely disrupts the flow of the game. Example being in the ASG, there was a strikeout to end the inning. Guy challenges it. Adds additional time guys are standing around doing nothing and delays the excitement of an inning ending strikeout in a big spot. Contrary, you get a big inning ending K on a close pitch? Pitcher celebrates only to find out it was a ball. Watching it felt awkward. Just make it fully automated if you’re going to do this.
Nonsense. It takes seconds. If they want to celebrate, throw an obvious strike or get a whiff. Complaining about the seconds it takes to get it right is just dumb.
The system at the ASG was a whole different system.
Can’t wait for some player to earn their team’s/media’s/fans’ ire by frequently blowing through his team’s challenges on pitches that weren’t even that borderline.
Vladdy Jr is going to be humbled at the beginning for sure
Ha ha. Yes. This happened in cricket. Players got the selfish rep for always blowing their teams challenges. Mercilessly mocked. It’s a skill.
I really wonder about how it’s going to go when I see some players pitch a fit at called strike 3 that the TV zone at least shows as being a clear strike. But it’s hard to know if all those complaints would go to challenges or not.
The immediacy of the call is going to lead to some emotion based decision making. I’m curious to see if the Juan Soto’s of the world are laying down internal rules about who can challenge. I foresee a veterans privilege situation.
This is a great point. My guess is rookies are not going to be making many challenges (pitchers, catchers, or batters).
Which underscores why the challenge system is ridiculous. Automate it completely or don’t use it at all.
Okay, then don’t use it at all, and keep the “sometimes you get the call, sometimes you don’t” rule — better known as “exactly the way it has been for 150 years.”
I’d be happy with that. But then, I like baseball.
That’s fine. I’m good with either, and I like baseball as well. But the challenge system tries to play both sides and is stupid in my opinion.
Jazz will blow through it in his first AB every game.
Jazz was the first guy who came to mind xD Although I think if there’s actual challenges on the line he might rein it in a bit.
Managers probably shouldn’t even let hitters challenge unless trailing in the 9th inning. Pitchers probably shouldn’t either as the catchers have the best idea of the zone.
I think the players will figure it out real quickly. Someone behind the screen will come up with a formula of when to use them. Like you have a 75% chance of being correct, or you have bases loaded, or either 3 balls or 2 strikes, etc.
I watched this occur with my local Triple-A team during the first couple of years of its institution. The same two players would blow through all three challenges by the 5th or 6th inning.
Both players were out of the organization the following year.
The team did a good job of policing its usage and now it isn’t an issue.
What a bunch of crap. This whole thing is stupid. You are taking the human element out of the game. No wonder the game of baseball is just going to crap.
No, what’s stupid is allowing terrible umpires to completely change the outcome of a game with erroneous calls. If a player doesn’t perform in the majors, he gets sent to the minors or released. Why aren’t umpires held responsible for their performance?
Malarkey. Umpires have always been a part of the game and umpiring has greatly improved over my lifetime. Umpires are evaluated and work their way up through the system. They are also graded.
Complaining of erroneous calls? Why not complain of players who lack baseball fundamentals and baseball smarts?
Skeptical is also way, way off base here. Players play. The umps are only supposed to monitor the play, not impact it. Comparing the two is a joke. Umps blowing balls and strikes has no place in this game anymore.
Lol so Fan6591 watches the game for the umpires, not the players eh? Weird position to take
The ONLY human element I care about when I watch baseball are the players.
Managers
I’m curious about how you feel about the foul pole. Should we take them down to introduce more human judgement?
This is not even remotely close to being a serious reply.
You have to admit, you had that coming.
While he’s obviously not serious about removing the foul poles, let me ask you this. Why are foul poles a thing? Is it because they’re pretty? Or is it because it eliminates some of the “human element” regarding calling fair and foul down the lines?
His question may not be serious, but his point is a valid one.
It really isn’t a valid point, precisely because he isn’t being serious. You might as well ask the same question about foul lines, or any other rule of the game that requires someone to make a human judgment. I was also pointing out the irony of the comment.
Yawn
One thing I can’t stand about football and basketball is the subjectivity of fouls. It seems that by rule, in football there’s holding on nearly every play in football and pass interference on nearly every contested passing play. It’s just a matter of when refs decide to call it. In basketball, there are fouls on basically every contested play near the hoop. I can’t stand how much refs decide the games in those sports.
This being adopted in MLB, along with replay already being in place, really takes away how much an umpire can screw up a game. I love this. The game should be between the players and teams, not the umpires.
Bingo.
Now they need to actually define checked swings.
They’re working on it.
I have mixed feelings about the automated strike zone. I am a bit romantic about the umps calling the zone, correct or not. But we have the technology not to have to put up with incorrect calls. For now, I think the challenge system, while imperfect, is the right way to go. Baby steps I guess. I do think if it goes well then a fully automated zone will come sooner or later.
As a frequent ump during my childhood pickup softball days, I have similar feelings. The kids today are not going to know anything about (playfully) kicking dirt, tossing bats and basepads onto the field, spitting seeds, and shouting.
Pathetic. All in or nothing.
Why is the binary the best options? Like saying let’s have fully automated cars or walk. It’s a tool of a trade not an extinction of a function.
Because wrong calls impact the game way beyond just a single pitch. I’d rather see it the other way around, have the calls all be automated with a possible override option. All the calls can be made in real time by machine and human. This will actually improve human accuracy. If there’s a glitch, you correct the call. None of this challenge garbage. Get every ball and strike call correct. That’s what I want.
But why would you prefer no automation over a challenge system? That’s the presumptive argument when saying “all or nothing.”
This needs to happen. But I really want it to be tinkered with so you don’t get BS calls like this (a ball 99% outside the zone is a ball. sorry)
reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/1iy689k/bo_naylor_u…
A ball that touches the zone is a strike, sorry.
But did it really touch the zone ? Is the tech accurate enough to overrule the human in a very very tight situation ? Is that not within its margin of error ?
This is the debate that will probably be forthcoming.
I’ll touch your zone.
Foppert, that would be a sight to see, since any calibrated electronic system is going to be LEAGUES more accurate than some human’s eyeballs trying to make a split second judgement through a mast looking over a shoulder from a diagonal angle in summer heat wearing pads and sweating for hours straight.
We’ll see what happens. More consistent for sure, but the tech has a margin for error, just like a human. So that’s when the questions arise. Games being decided by the tech, when the situation is so so close, even the tech can’t be 100% relied upon. Then you have to ask yourself, should we really be overruling an umpire when it’s that close ? If everyone accepts it’s 100% accurate then no problem. That’s easy to say, then you lose a game or two on super close overruled calls…….
Been through it all in cricket. Took them well over a decade to find the happy medium.
I picked an extreme example but to the hitter that ball is grossly off the plate. The vast majority of hitters are not going to swing at that the vast majority of the time and the best anyone will get out of it is a popup to left field. The strike zone is already subjective and calls like that just take the bat out of the hitter’s hands. Might as well just keep the umps for that
How is it subjective? It’s not. Math can measure the zone up from the corners of the plate, and math can adjust it based on the hitter’s height. The ball can be placed with precision based on measurements of it’s height and lateral position relative to that zone. If it clips the zone, it’s a strike. That’s all there is to it. Baseball has always, always counted pitches that nick the zone as strikes. Even a stitch in the zone counts.
A strike doesn’t have to be hittable. The best ones aren’t.
Will Yankees fans still be crying when their 8 foot tall silverback still gets rung up?
Apparently KBO already has fully automated ball strike system. Why is the supposed ‘world standard’ of baseball lagging behind? Why not just fully automate it instead of a challenge system?
My concern of a fully automated system would be how ugly catching would become. Outside of when runners are on base, what reason would a catcher have to frame a pitch? He could literally just catch it however he wanted, not stick it and still get the call. I just think it would look really sloppy and unprofessional.
I think it would make catching better, as the only thing teams care about is pitch framing, Without pitch framing, catching would return to emphasizing traditional skills like blocking balls in the dirt, controlling the running game, avoiding catchers interference, and hitting. Catching is incredibly sloppy now, as these other facets of the game are discarded in favor of pitch framing.
FWIW, I think a catcher pulling a pitch that is 6 inches outside, back into the middle of the plate, is ugly.
Because they want to give major league catchers and pitchers a chance to make adjustments to the ABS system. Lots of catcher and pitcher tandems currently lean on catcher pitch-framing to get their calls. MLB parks also need more data to fine-tune for a full ’27 ABS rollout.
The umps are still greatly involved. There are only 2 incorrect challenges for each team. If the challenges are successful over and over the umps will either be forced to improve or the incompetent umps (and there are plenty of them) will be exposed. I welcome the new system.
very good.
next item of business: dismantling the umpire’s union.
Why have umps.Do every thing by cameras and sensors?Might streamline the game even more for the people who need to watch Netflix.Can’t sit through a game and enjoy the outdoors.But no umps mean no arguing.Which slows the game down.Make it that coaches can talk on the frequency so no more mound visits.Unless it is to change pitches.Anything to speed the game up.Maybe start of with a 2-1 count like most softball leagues i have played in.That would speed up the game.No more than 2 foul balls.Then your out.If you hit a homerun ,you don’t run the bases.
the union.
Calm down with the overgeneralization and the exaggerations, “TB Sox NY”
You probably breeze past as many teams’ games than shows on Netflix, too.
Perhaps work on your spacing and punctuation, it’ll help you catch up with the times.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m really hoping we see commercials while a pitch is reviewed.
Knowing MLB could profit from this would make it much easier to support.
Fanduel. You can make a quick bet on your smart TV whether the challenge will be overturned.
Longtime fan here, back to 1967, when I was six. The umps simply miss too many calls in key situations. Maybe it was always that way but it sure is now.
I remember Charlie O’Brien getting Maddux calls 10-12″ off the plate. How do you even hit that?
Look up Joe Brinkman with Galvine pitching in Game 6 of the 95 World Series. Still bitter about that.
Google Game 5, 1997 NLCS, Eric Gregg’s bad calls.
This was a great article about it in AJC. ajc.com/sports/further-review-blog/infamous-eric-g…
Is the quality of an average major league player with 30 teams just as good as it was with 20 teams? That’s might answer your question.
I’d say far far better. Stronger, faster, better conditioned. Major leaguers now obviously come from all over the world. The talent pool population wise is much deeper.
Probably far better. 1968 was the last year we had less than 30 teams. The US population was 203M. The increase in population for out-paced the increase in the number of players. In addition, we have loads more foreigners.
Long time fan here also. Umpiring is definitely more difficult today because of how pitching has changed. For the most part every pitcher can throw near 95 mph and many can add curves or sliders near that velocity. I welcome the challenge system.I would like to know how many pitches were overturned in spring training games this year.
Thank god. The umpires just are not capable of accurately judging balls and strikes as ball speed and movement have grown.
I love this! Mostly to shatter the false confidence of a select few idiots behind the plate.
It was AMAZING in the all-star game. I’m so happy about this.
Twins fired their scouts,too many mediocre to terrible teams, robot umps, analytic overload,stat nerds getting erections during games, advertising on every inch of the field and Manfred is a toady for asswipe owners. It’s all about $ and making casinos happy. It used to be a good game
@jhanley108
Just look at old style stadiums. They were plastered with ads everywhere.
Not helmets, handrails, mound, bathroom, microphones, green screens-it’s a transactional game now.
Baseball players having to shave during games, spitting on the baseballs, spiking baserunners, dirtying balls with licorice, pissing near the bullpen, traveling on continental railroads and telegraphing checks through an operator is jhanley (Not Ramirez) 108’s ideal baseball.
You’re only a minority in this, thankfully.
“stat nerds getting erections during games”
Why should the eye-testers have all the fun?
We want erections too!
My condolences.
Just go fully automated. Cut out the middleman and the wasted time of challenges.
Moving forward. Good to see. There will be issues. The first game that is decided by a very very close challenge could be a spectacle ! Losing folks will be unhappy.
Can’t wait to a ball/strike call to be challenged on the last out of the World Series. Full count. Ball 4 called. Pitcher challenges and wins and that’s how the WS ends? Welcome to the league of postponed drama.
How do you feel about instant reply overturning a HR call to end a game?
HR calls are boundary calls and the original reason for replay. When you start asking yourself on certain plays “is this reviewable?” It’s already gone too far. This is something that’s going to be in the eye of the beholder (meaning the hitter or pitcher) to use which is a problem I see on the horizon
It will help account for the wild framing that had been going on. But I still think 2 things could happen that would make it easier for Umpires. One: give them pitch coms so they can hear the pitch and be ready for what they are looking for or 2: use vision technology (like smart glasses) to see the strike zone defined.
Watching the challenge system in spring training games, I was less bothered by it than I thought I’d be. In this limited use I’m fine with it being implemented in real games. Still, I have to laugh at the fans who think they somehow invented complaining about umpires. Guess what? It’s as much a part of the game as the ground rule double, and always has been. So stop already with the demands to “perfect” a game that’s pretty damned perfect already.
But it isn’t perfect. The strike zone varies from umpire to umpire, some players get favorable calls while others don’t, and you had horrific umpires like Angel Hernandez who should have been fired decades ago.
I figured someone would try to argue against my point and prove it at the same time. Congrats on being the first. Next?
So, according to you, Angel Hernandez was perfect. I think that tells everyone everything they need to know about you and your argument.
So you are okay with egregious calls that cost teams important games? Like the Jeffrey Maier play that should have been ruled fan interference and an out, but instead was ruled a HR, and cost the Orioles their run in the playoffs. It was absolutely clear on replay that this play was absolutely not a HR and was fan interference.
So, I didn’t prove your point at all, I just exposed you for what you really are.
I can’t type what is sounds like to me.
I swear most people who use that term have no idea what it actually means.
Um, what?
It satisfies the player’s egos. It gives the fans a compromised version that appeases both sides of the argument. It satisfies the umpire’s egos.
And yet the challenge system doesn’t solve the issue of balls and strikes. There will still be wrong calls.
This solution will only appear to address the situation. This is a political change, and a pathetic one at it.
The best case would’ve been to do the automatic but not rub the umpire face into it. Let the umpire call it out but if they get the answer in their ear. This way they can defer if they miss it or aren’t certain. Some way to at least keep their human skills without their mistakes interfering. And take all the silly boxes away from the broadcasts. The point of this technology is to provide incredible faith in the balls and strikes from the umpires. The less fans have the answers, the more players trust the umpires, the better the on field game goes. Unless the idea that drama makes for better entertainment is what is really happening.
This is to remove bias and just terrible umpires from the game. I don’t care about the umpires’ feelings. If they don’t want to get upset, then do a better job and stop holding grudges.
Although I’d like to agree, people are generally quick to spite. And people with a backing (their union) will act arrogantly. Especially those prideful guys.
Yes, like the umpire’s union.
That’s a stretch. The auto was beta, and I’m skeptical the league was ever really interested in that option. The challenge system was always their horse for the reasons I originally mentioned. When you pick a horse, you’ll get the outcomes you want.
At the SABER conference in Dallas they mentioned that the difference between one missed call on a 1-1 count changes the whole game. 2-1 vs. 1-2.
I have no doubt about that. Just look at some of the differences like 3-0 compared to 2-1. The difference in OPS is huge.
baseball-reference.com/leagues/split.cgi?t=b&…
THIS is why I hate the challenge system. It’s like how the NBA only reviews calls in the last 2 minutes…like other calls aren’t important. Players may not challenge that call, especially early in the game, but it could have a huge impact on the game.
Judge is about to walk 300 times next year.
The strike is a lot bigger when it’s automated. They’ll need to shrink the zone if they don’t want offense to drop more than it already has.
The strike zone is already defined in the rule book. Supposed to be letters to the knees, but then that shrunk to basically belt to the knees. At least now you won’t have worry about pitches a foot off the plate being called a strike now, or umpires with a bias to start calling pitches off the plate against certain hitters, or not calling strikes for certain pitchers.
Ed – glad someone else remembers when it was “letters”. Yes, it seems like a belt high fastball is either crushed or called a ball!
The strike zone is exactly what it says it is in the rules with ABS. With umpires its different every game.
Yanks have had the most wrong favorable calls per umpire tracking… he’ll likely have 300 punchouts.
Good thing Angel Hernandez retired. His games would have taken 6 hours to get through with this new system.
At some point, Angel would have cracked and charged the operator and kicked him out and destroyed the system!
He would have ejected the robotic eye.
I’ve worked Baseball on multiple levels for over 40 years, including trying to get into professional baseball (umpire school in 1985).
Not going to watch MLB in the future, Most of you who complain have never put the gear on, you have no idea how to call balls and strikes, and now you want to take the human part of the game out, mostly so bettors and gambling web sites can have a bigger say in games. .
Sorry, you just destroyed the best game ever invented,
Mmmmmm By having a human element is how you can manipulate the system not the other way around.
The only human element I want to influence on the game are the players not the man on black.
This game is about the players, ump, not you.
The game will still continue without you watching.
Just like an MLB umpire with the ego…
THIS GAME ISN’T ABOUT YOU!
Goodbye. You won’t be missed.
I’m looking forward to this!
The human element that should decide games = the players.
This helps that cause.
Can they pitch? My team could use that.
Have the very bad calls made automatically in less than 2 seconds. Try to get it like is in tennis in a few years.
They will go to full automated when an error, human or otherwise, causes ABS to flash on the screen either when not requested or the other team was out of challenges–and the ump’s call is overturned.
I personally hate the idea of a challenge system. If you ask anyone who supports replay why it’s important, you’ll almost always get an answer of “because it’s important to get the calls right.” Well, if that’s the case, then have it be fully automated.
Do it like goal line technology in soccer. The ump wears a buzzer on his wrist. It says instantly if it’s a strike. The ump signals so everyone can see. No challenges.
Also, the “strategy” that goes into it. So do you not challenge that 1-0 pitch which was called a ball because you’re afraid of losing your challenge? There’s a big difference between 2-0 and 1-1.
College football and soccer (using VAR) have it right. Just review everything and cut out the stupid challenges.
VAR in soccer really is a challenge system, although the challenge is by another official, after the initial call is made by the officials on the field. And the video assisted review is often very time consuming. For that reason, like baseball and football’s challenge system, it is limited to crucial plays. I suspect that if the technology was such that offsides could be determined in real time soccer would go to an automated system. Balls and strikes are different, the technology allows the calls to me made as quickly as an umpire would. That is similar to line calls in tennis, but for reasons I don’t understand, tennis has a challenege system. Nobody watches a tennis match to see the line judges, and nobody watches a baseball game to see the umpires. .
Yeah, that was my point is that VAR isn’t a challenge system. I completely agree that something like VAR would be obnoxious for balls and strikes, though. Your point on tennis is spot on as well…the challenge system is stupid.
Don’t need VAR with ABS. The system can automatically call the balls and strikes, relay it to the HP umpire, who then indicates if the pitch is a ball or a strike. It takes no extra time. It also saves time because there is no arguing from players or coaches.
If the system goes down there is still an umpire behind the plate. That umpire also has the benefit of seeing every pitch exactly what is and isn’t a strike, so if the system goes down for an inning or even for an entire game they are more likely to get the calls correct.
Be reminded that the box you see on TV for balls and strikes can be as much as 3 inches wrong. Brian Kenney.
My understanding, however, is that’s not the Hawkeye system they’re using.
Margin for error in Hawkeye is defined in cricket by 1/2 a ball. Umpire gets half a ball. If his mistake is by more than half the width of the ball, decision changed.
The Hawkeye system tracks the flight of the ball within 2.5 mm or .0984 inches in 3D.
Whether Fox Sports or ESPN gets their onscreen overlay 100% correct has no bearing on the accuracy of the ABS system.
UmpScorecard must have been bought by the Umps Union after seeing the score for the Brewers/Padres game last night. It was pure guessing for both teams and that leads to screwy games. If umps were really 94% accurate, we wouldnt be having this conversation.
I agree with the change, although I would prefer all robot calls — no wasted time, no arguments, no missed calls because a challenge wasn’t made. But I will say this, a “Joint” Competition Committee in which a six person majority are owners is a joke. The announcement doesn’t say how the vote went, but it did not say it was unanimous and likely the umpire member and at least some of the players voted against. I of course disagree, but 60% of the players are pitchers and catchers and more accurate and consistent ball/strike calling will negatively impact them. If the players are not to have a meaningful voice on rules changes, they should stop participating in this sham “Joint” committee.
Now, bring up Jen Pawol to the major leagues full-time.
25 missed calls in last night’s Brewers-Padres game. (Equally bad on both sides.) And only two challenges?
You can have 25 challenges. Players just have to keep being right. 2 is good. Frivolous challenges are no good for anyone.
There were only 24 borderline calls. The umpire missed one pitch that was obvious as well.
Can’t wait for the first batter challenge of a sure strike called a ball.
This is just another huge step in the Destruction of Traditional Game of Baseball & to make the Game more like they play on their Video Game console. This decision screams that the younger people don’t have any Respect for the Game of Baseball & that they want everything absolutely perfect. All these ANTI Traditional Baseball Rules are going to drive the REAL Baseball Fans who Respect the game away
No it won’t (Not) George Herman “Babe” Ruth.
See ya, wouldn’t wanna be ya.
Yes it’s a further step in the destruction of the Traditional Game of Baseball & by your reply you are obviously ANTI Traditional Baseball & prefer the game to be like what you play on your Video Console
Watching Pirates-Reds with Ramon DeJesus behind the plate and yikes! Calling balls and strikes using a Magic 8-Ball maybe. He’s sure not watching the ball.
I don’t understand the whole “dog and pony show” with the voting committee. The owners have 6 of the 11 votes. The other 5 votes don’t matter at all. It’s like the Supreme Court. The minority has ZERO power. The owners are going to get whatever they want. Zac Gallen, one of the players that voted, basically said as much when asked what changed his mind.
Yep, the owners say, “we make the rules, but thank you for your input.”
Need way more than 2 challenges!
They can burn through that in one at bat!
To defend Maddux and Glavine..
Pitch to the Umpire’s Visual Weakness!
9-2. Ask six owners, three of four players and the lone umpire voted in favor.
The maths don’t add up
Ask=All
They wrote it wrong. The umpire voted against it.
Ironic that statheads can’t do math.
I am fundamentally opposed to this. Pragmatically, since the umpires suck, I am for it.
“7:33pm: Major League Baseball’s Joint Competition Committee voted 9-2 to approve the ABS challenge system, Bob Nightengale of USA Today reports. All six owners, three of the four players, and the lone umpire on the committee voted in favor of the change.”
That would make the vote 10-1.
Maybe the ump got his vote wrong. More proof we need this.
Boo
Suggest this be referred to as The Eric Gregg rule.
can someone pls explain to me
why Full ABS systems cant do the job
but a challenge system does do the job? isnt it the same exact thing? the full system calls balls/strikes for every pitch, and the challenge system only calls selected balls/strikes. but the system should work the same. or am i totally not getting something here?
They probably need to test it in the minors first. There would need to implement a visual and audible call at the plate for all the players to see and hear so they can react in real-time. I’d guess we’re a few years away from that.
They have been doing it in the minors. For six years. Mlb wont implement a full system because they don’t like the way the full system recognizes the strike zone. But it does like the strike zone that the system recognizes in the challenge system? doesn’t make sense
The Challenge system is far more entertaining, people really like to see the umpires shown up, so MLB is going with it.
Baseball is entertainment first and foremost.
Shark,
They already did that all the way up to AAA. The system sent the umpire a signal that told them if it was a ball or strike and they announced it at the plate just like they would make the call.
Just my opinion but here are my arguments for and against the automated system. My argument for the system, Correct calls and should eliminate questions of umpire bias behind the plate.
My argument against. Perfecting calls makes the game boring. I believe that mistakes are part of what makes the game exciting. They certainly make good highlights. Personally, I like to watch the player or manager have a go at the umpire.
Long overdue. Manfred improving the game
Um, 6 + 3 +1 =10.
The linked article mentions that the ump voted against the change. Not sure what got lost in translation but yeah one player and the ump were against.
Can they then fire the umps with the most overturned calls at the end of the season? Seems like a great way to improve the quality of umps. Of course the union would never approve. But it would certainly be interesting to see the numbers. The guy the other day was terrible on low strikes and would have been overturned multiple times.
The rules state 2 challenges per team per game. Extra innings 1 more to each team per + innings. Only the Catcher,Pitcher and Hitter can Challenge (no exceptions) come on ! This will be hilarious. Especially when the challenge is foolish and some batter or pitcher who always thinks they’re being railroaded lose the challenge that could have proven better later on. It actually adds to the game. Umpires are still calling it they just might be challenged 4 times in a regular game. It’s just my opinion.
In minor league games with the challenge system as many as 15 calls have been challenged in a single game this season. As long as you are correct, you get another challenge.
@Steve
Per the article :
And the umpires voted against it.
Lame
The main reason for this is of course to save money by not paying umps. It was inevitable. The change the league really needs is to allow draft picks to be traded.
There will not be fewer umpires. There will still be a HP umpire.
Maybe just give the ump a headset that tells him the result of the pitch immediately. Thus avoiding the challenge aspect…..I would trade this for the automatic runner on second in Xtra innings…I despise it and it changes the game too much. Look at the playoff races and think how importantnt one game can be in a teams season….
That is what they did for several seasons in the minors. The challenge system is being instituted because it’s more fun than 100% of calls being correct. We all want to see the umpires get called out and proven wrong. This allows that drama in the game.
In reality, the umps are no better or worse than they have ever been. Pitchers are now throwing harder than ever and that makes it more difficult to call the pitch. Plus, the superimposed strike zone box on the tv screen gives a clear answer to the correct call. A casual fan (my wife) can call a better game using that than any MLB umpire standing behind the catcher.
I agree with the headset idea, an umpiring version of pitch com. It would be instantaneous and final. The technology appears to be there so why not utilize it?
The umpires today are almost assuredly better due to access to video technology and constant reviews. We as fans can see things better than we could in the past which is why some think umpires are worse.
Need to automate the check swing. So many missed calls. How can an umpire 90 plus feet away tell if your bat crossed the plate?
By looking? My best guess.
Anyway, before automating the calling of checked swings, the rule book has to be amended to include a definition for a swing/checked swing. None has ever existed, so whether or not a batter offered at a pitch has always been a judgment call on the part of the umpires. Umpires have always used a variety of unofficial criteria. Did the bat cross the plate? Did the batter roll/break his wrists? This makes the argument for there being “so many missed calls” kind of nonsensical.