Would a ball-strike challenge system work in MLB? Players weigh in how to hold umpires accountable

ARLINGTON — Maybe more than ever, we simply can’t stop talking about how the umpires call balls and strikes. That is, how poorly they make those calls, at least if you listen to the masses. I’ve maintained for a long time the umpires are actually amazing at calling balls and strikes and that they are better than they ever have been. The problem is with all the technology available these days, the fans and players alike see every single missed call, even if it’s just a centimeter. Understandably, at least to a point, there’s a ton of anger when calls get missed. 

If we have the technology to fix major misses, shouldn’t said technology be used? It’s being used as high as Triple-A right now, where players can challenge a ball or strike call. Hitters ask for a review by tapping the top of their helmet and nearly immediately, we find out what the ruling it. It’s very streamlined and hardly takes any time. Shouldn’t we do that at the big-league level? 

The players are divided, just as one would expect. Some really want it. Some don’t want any part of it. Most are somewhere in between. 

Orioles youngster Jordan Westburg was in the minors with the system in place and seems to like it, but he’s also fine without it. 

“I don’t have an answer for that. I got to experience it in Triple-A and I liked it,” he said Monday ahead of the All-Star Game. “I think it was good for all parties because we had a more consistent understanding of the strike zone, but I’m a big fan of the traditional human element in baseball. It leads to more personal human interaction. You get to ask questions, you get to feel guys out, like there’s a cat-and-mouse kinda game to it with pitchers and catchers and hitters, too. If the game does go in that direction I’m not gonna hold my hands up and be upset, but it would be a little saddening to see the human element go away.” 

Tigers outfielder Riley Greene and Orioles catcher Adley Rutschman were also agnostic on the question. 

“I would say it’s a touchy subject,” Greene said. “Either way for me personally it doesn’t really bother me. I would say it’s part of the game. It can be frustrating as a hitter, at times, but it doesn’t bother me.” 

“I’m not super-opinionated on stuff in general,” said Rutschman. “My job is just to show up and play and do the best I can. I don’t really have too much to say about it either way, so I’m just gonna have a positive mindset about anything that comes about.” 

The “human element” is a phrase utterd by nearly every player to whom I spoke. Many of them really enjoy discussing the calls with the umpires to get a feel for the zone for each particular night. 

“I like having an umpire and being able to have conversations with them and develop a relationship with them,” Orioles shortstop Gunnar Henderson said. “I like just being able to talk to somebody.” 

“I’ve always been a fan of the human element,” said Royals starter Seth Lugo. “I’ve always said if there were automatic strikes, I could throw a lot more strikes, but I’m sure the hitters will think it would benefit them. That’s a tough one. I have an appreciation for the umpires; it’s hard being back there. It’s hard enough for me. There will be times I’ll think ‘that was a strike’ and I’ll go back and look and they got it right. You gotta give them credit.” 

Guardians leadoff man extraordinaire Steven Kwan is for a system, but isn’t 100% sure. 

“I got to have a rehab start and I had the automatic balls and strikes, so I got to experience those, but I haven’t had the challenge zone. In my head it sounds like a good idea, but I think the psychology of be willing to burn a challenge on a call that may or may not a big part of the game, I’m not sure about that part,” he said. “In a vacuum it sounds like it would be effective.” 

Brewers outfielder Christian Yelich wants a system of limited challenges, something commissioner Rob Manfred has hinted would be the preferred methodology.

“I think certain moments in the game, if something is egregious and it’s a game-changing thing, it would be nice to have a couple opportunities to review it,” the former MVP said. “I think everybody wants to get it right, they just want the game decided on the field with the least impact from outside sources. But the human aspect has been a part of baseball forever and I don’t want to lose that. I just think if you have huge moments in games and plays where a ball or a strike could change the outcome of the game, I’d like to have it.

“There should only be a certain amount for guys to use in big moments, obviously there’d be an adjustment period but we’d get it right.” 

Reds pitcher Hunter Greene suggests that overcoming adversity is a plus and sometimes the universe karmically gives one back. 

“I don’t know, man. It’s funny, we just had this meeting with the commissioner and there’s so many cool, original rules within MLB and that human element of errors,” he said. “You watch a game and a game gets blown by a call and then somebody is able to come back and score two runs and win the game, right? There’s moments of finding a way to get back on top and that’s part of the game. It sucks when you lose on calls, but it’s the game. It’s just how baseball is played and that’s the beauty of the sport.” 

Logan Webb has perhaps selfish reasons for maintaining the status quo.

“To be honest with you, I get, I think, the most called strikes out of the zone in baseball, so probably not?!” he said laughing. “I would like to keep it how it is. You probably hear people for both sides. We’ve had some guys doing rehab and pitching in the minors, [Blake] Snell, Robbie [Ray], so I’ve heard about it. It’s hit or miss, some people like it, some don’t.” 

And Phillies superstar Bryce Harper wants to tie umpire performance to how often they get assignments behind the plate, also paying those umpires more as a result. 

“I enjoy the human aspect of the game, I do, it just has to be done the right way and I don’t know what that would be.

“But the one thing I think,” he said. “If you’re a really good umpire, I think you should get paid more and that you should umpire more than one game per week behind the plate. Even if we don’t have the challenge system, if the better umpires are behind the plate all the time, I think it’s better for baseball.” 

The only thing the players nearly unanimously agree on is being averse to full-time, so-called “robot umpires” where a human being is never calling balls and strikes. They don’t like that. If MLB implemented a system where a team could challenge, say, two balls and strikes calls per game, it could offer the best of both worlds. Human umpires are still plying their craft behind home plate and the most egregious calls, as Yelich noted, could be fixed with challenges. But would teams save them too often? Kwan mentioned it might be difficult to figure out exactly what pitches should be challenged and which bad calls everyone could live with. You could have said that about the replay system before it was instituted too.

No one is trying to get rid of the umpires, but there is clearly an appetite for change when it comes to calling balls and strikes.