SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. — Earlier this month in the Arizona Fall League, Red Sox prospect Stephen Scott struck out looking at a fastball at the bottom of the zone. For most of baseball’s long and storied history, that has been the end of it. Disbelieving stares and snide comments were but symbolic protests in a world governed solely by the umpire’s say-so. But instead of trudging back to the dugout, Scott exercised a right that few baseball players have ever enjoyed.
He challenged the call.
In seconds, the big screen was overtaken by an animated graphic of a pitch flying towards the plate, its trajectory brightly colored like the tail of a comet. As it passed through a rectangular representation of the strike zone, clipping its bottom edge, the verdict was delivered: strike. The umpire had been correct. A dugout-bound trudge ensued after all, but at least Scott had been able to ask the ump to prove it.
The whole episode, which lasted no more than 10-15 seconds, was a byproduct of an experimental rule being tested this fall by Major League Baseball. This year, for the first time ever in the sport’s history — first in the Low-A Florida State League, then in select Triple-A parks and now in the AFL — ball-and-strike calls have been subject to in-game review . Now, several times over the course of fall games at Salt River Fields, the only park with the review system in place, the action comes to a brief pause so that everyone in the stadium can immediately see if the umpire got it right.
And players seem to like it.
“So far, I think it’s pretty good,” said Rockies prospect Grant Lavigne.
“It’s honestly pretty cool,” added Cardinals shortstop Masyn Winn.
“It’s going to make the game a little more interesting,” said Braves prospect Justyn-Henry Malloy.
The automated balls and strikes (ABS) challenge system being tested works as follows: Each team enters the game with three challenges, keeping the ones it wins for repeated use. Challenges must be issued immediately, and only by the catcher, pitcher or hitter. Unlike in the replay review system currently in use for non-ball-and-strike calls in the majors, a manager cannot challenge a pitch. Umpires do not huddle or retreat to a headset, but instead watch along with the rest of the stadium as the correct call is displayed on the scoreboard.
A lot of buzz around video of #Yankees prospect Jasson Domínguez successfully using the ABS challenge system to overturn a called strike in the Fall League.
Here’s more on how that works: https://t.co/3fooHZKlHr pic.twitter.com/n0pHF598ZA
— MLB Pipeline (@MLBPipeline) October 20, 2022
It’s a system similar to the one used for boundary calls in tennis, powered by the same Hawk-Eye technology, but that seeks to find a middle ground between human and robot umpires. For several years, MLB has had the tech to transition to full ABS, and indeed has tested such a system at various levels of the minors in recent seasons. With the challenge system, though, the league hopes to preserve the human element while providing something of a technological safety net.
The disruption caused by any challenge is brief, lasting mere seconds, and a speedy turnaround was an absolute necessity for any such system. “It was really important for us to have a solution that was quick,” said Joe Martinez, a former pitcher who now serves as MLB’s vice president of on-field strategy. But even if challenges elongate a game by just one minute, the wrinkles they add to the sport are numerous. By challenging calls themselves, players exercise potentially game-changing authority previously reserved for managers. With real-time feedback on pitch location, the zone may become more consistent as a game progresses. And by giving players recourse to dispute borderline calls, ejections may go down dramatically.
The first issue teams and players must figure out is who can challenge and when. One team in the fall league — the Salt River Rafters, who play every home game with the ability to challenge — has prohibited pitchers from challenging. “Because of emotion,” said Salt River pitching coach Shane Loux, a Diamondbacks staffer. “We don’t need them getting pissed and challenging 2-0 pitches in the second inning.” The three-challenge limit is designed to prevent frivolous uses, incentivizing teams to save them for the most consequential calls. Thus, situational awareness is key.
With so much power in their hands, players must weigh the stakes against their confidence in their own perception. “You get a borderline pitch early in the first inning. Is it really worth it to challenge?” asked Red Sox infielder Nick Yorke. Others have taken stock of their strike-zone awareness. Malloy knows he sees the high and outside pitch better than anything in, so don’t expect him to challenge many inside strikes. Braves right-hander William Woods chooses to trust his catcher instead of his own eyes, attached as they are to a head in constant movement at the end of his delivery. Others reserve challenges for obvious missed calls. “One of those easy spits,” Yorke said.
That hasn’t stopped players from exercising the privilege, though. Scott wasn’t the only one to issue a challenge during that mid-October game, although he was the only one memorialized in the play-by-play on the league’s Gameday tracker. Many times throughout the game, a pitch would be delivered only for a player to immediately tap his hat or helmet, signaling the call for a review.
Then a brief moment of suspense. Here again, the league is trying to split the difference between speed and entertainment. Inspired once more by tennis, the pitch is animated in the same style as the Gameday tracker, leaving everyone on pins and needles. The players appear to like the anticipation. “It’s like a weird excitement that you get,” said Braves shortstop Cal Conley. Yorke describes it in a way that evokes being called to the principal’s office in middle school. “Everyone’s like, ‘Ooooooh!'” he said. If you’ve watched a 55-foot putt approach the pin, you know the feeling.
“It fires everyone up,” Malloy said. “It creates that little anticipation of ‘aaaaaaaaahhhh OH!'”
So far, the umpire has been right more often than not. Through Oct. 24, challenges in the fall league had been successful only 33 percent of the time, according to statistics kept by MLB. That’s a worse rate than in Low A and Triple A, which saw success rates of 44 and 48 percent, respectively. Perhaps relatedly, there have been only 4.4 challenges per game in the AFL, compared to 5.8 and 5.7 per game in Low A and Triple A. Batters have been more successful than pitchers and catchers in the AFL, which may be why they challenge more often than their defensive counterparts. The opposite is true in the other two leagues, where pitchers and catchers challenge more often than hitters, and are more often successful.
What MLB has not tracked at its testing sites is the effect on ejections, although several in the fall league predict a decrease. There were 176 ejections in the majors last year, according to tracking from CloseCallSports.com, and 51 percent of them were for arguing balls and strikes. Without a challenge system, complaining to the umpire was a player or manager’s only recourse. Scottsdale Scorpions manager Matt Tuiasosopo, who coaches in the minors with the Braves, isn’t fond of chirping at the umpires, but would do it occasionally to support his players. But now, if players “feel they’ve been wronged,” he said, “they can challenge it.” Added Malloy: “It’s almost as if you’re able to say, ‘My eye over yours. Let’s see what it looks like.’”
That may reduce ejections, but it remains to be seen what broader effect the system has on the umpire player-relationship. (A spokesperson for the Association of Minor League Umpires did not respond to an interview request.) Umpires certainly have gotten used to the replay system in the big leagues, and many players figure they’ll adapt to this one, too. “I hope they don’t get offended,” said Lavigne. A challenge doesn’t have to be taken antagonistically. “Players have a lot of respect for umpires, even though they can suck,” said Conley. “Just like us,” he quickly and diplomatically added.
Others have their doubts. “I almost think there could be a negative repercussion” for hitters, said Diamondbacks catcher Cooper Hummel. Similarly, Loux worries that umpires will hold a subconscious grudge against players who challenge. “Oh, this guy,” the pitching coach said, imagining what goes on in an umpire’s head. “He challenges every close pitch.” A gripe or a stare might be forgotten, especially since almost every hitter complains. But what about a literal challenge to one’s authority played for the whole stadium?
Questions like that, of course, are why the league tests these systems before implementing them. And players and coaches do have suggestions.
Some would like more challenges to use, or to divide them between defense and offense. With the system in use in only one fall league park, visiting hitters say they sometimes forget they can object to certain pitches. Tuiasosopo wouldn’t mind seeing pitch locations on the big board, regardless of if they’re challenged. At least once, Loux said, an umpire mistook a pitcher’s hat adjustment for a challenge signal, causing confusion. “We had to have a meeting,” he said. “It took two minutes!” The three-challenge limit also has not fully eliminated all frivolous reviews. Winn admits to challenging one on a goof in a lopsided game. “It was a slider directly down the middle,” he said with a laugh. “In those nine boxes, it hit the middle box.”
Loux counts himself among what appears to be the minority that is against adopting MLB’s experiment. He’d rather see full-time robo umps. “An average game has like 240 pitches,” he said, “and we’re worried about six of them.” Perhaps unsurprisingly, given that he’s a catcher who derives some value by stealing strikes, Hummel prefers human umpires and no challenges at all. “I like it,” he said of the challenge system, “but at the same time, I don’t know if I want it.” Blue Jays infielder Addison Barger hates it and also prefers only human umps. “It just gives you another thing to worry about in a sport where there’s already way too much to think about,” he said. Ironically, he’s won every single challenge he’s initiated.
But most players and coaches in the fall league who spoke to The Athletic feel different. They see a system that provides for real-time umpire accountability, and one that adds a fun strategic element to the game. It’s quick, painless and even exciting. It would make for an interesting adjustment to the rules, although there’s no clear timetable for when it could be adopted in the majors. MLB’s competition committee is stacked in favor of the league, allowing commissioner Rob Manfred to adopt rule changes over objections from the players union, but nothing so far suggests that strike zone challenges are coming to the majors in 2023.
If the league does adopt it, though, it will represent a fundamental change to how the game answers its most fundamental question. Was that strike, or was it a ball? Just tap your head and you’ll find out.
(Photo: David Richard / USA Today)
.