Bleacher Bums Forum

Correct challenges don't cost team, whether it's a pitch-call or a manager's-challenge.  Angels had two manager-challenges yesterday, with time to look at tape.  The first one, the manager was too slow, and the clock ran out a second before he raised the challenge.  That was the first run of the game, Amaya scoring from 1st on a Hoerner double, with the throw beating Amaya, but the catcher accidentally sweeping glove wide and opening an alley.  I think the play was too close to overturn; ump having called him safe, I suspect there wasn't enough proof to overturn.  But if he'd been called out, I definitely don't think there would have been proof to overturn and call him safe.  Later, Hoerner stole 2nd, again the throw beat him, but the initial tag, glove was raised and kinda missed.  Think he was probably out, but the replay wasn't decisive, so call stood.  Had initial call been out, I suspect it would not have overturned.  anyway, those manager challenges, with access to look at tape first, and given a bunch of seconds, that's different from ball-strike.  Nobody is allowed time to check tape, the catcher or batter needs to tap really quick.  Those are kinda fun, because the answer goes up on the scoreboard in two seconds and it's resolved. 

Tangent, but I've been impressed how rarely the umps are actually wrong on ball-strike.  In past, I would have guessed a higher volume of errors, and a higher volume of flagrant, not-even-that-close errors.  But they seem much more correct than I expected, and the times they miss, it's rarely by much.  I think the ABS system has definitely increased my respect for the umps. 

Correct challenges don't cost team, whether it's a pitch-call or a manager's-challenge.  Angels had two manager-challenges yesterday, with time to look at tape.  The first one, the manager was too slow, and the clock ran out a second before he raised the challenge.  That was the first run of the game, Amaya scoring from 1st on a Hoerner double, with the throw beating Amaya, but the catcher accidentally sweeping glove wide and opening an alley.  I think the play was too close to overturn; ump having called him safe, I suspect there wasn't enough proof to overturn.  But if he'd been called out, I definitely don't think there would have been proof to overturn and call him safe.  Later, Hoerner stole 2nd, again the throw beat him, but the initial tag, glove was raised and kinda missed.  Think he was probably out, but the replay wasn't decisive, so call stood.  Had initial call been out, I suspect it would not have overturned.  anyway, those manager challenges, with access to look at tape first, and given a bunch of seconds, that's different from ball-strike.  Nobody is allowed time to check tape, the catcher or batter needs to tap really quick.  Those are kinda fun, because the answer goes up on the scoreboard in two seconds and it's resolved. 

Tangent, but I've been impressed how rarely the umps are actually wrong on ball-strike.  In past, I would have guessed a higher volume of errors, and a higher volume of flagrant, not-even-that-close errors.  But they seem much more correct than I expected, and the times they miss, it's rarely by much.  I think the ABS system has definitely increased my respect for the umps. 

I think a bunch of umpire misses are going unchallenged right now, mainly because teams are reluctant to use their limited number of available challenges in non-crucial situations. I’m not sure if it’s a reflection on their strike zone knowledge (or lack of), but I have screamed at the TV for a challenge several times watching our games, to no avail. Dansby comes to mind immediately as a multiple times recipient of my ire.

Very true. 

Andy Fletcher had 11 challenges last night…9 were successful.

I just want the right calls made. I want players to freely question calls without risk of not being able to challenge a call in a late, crucial situation. If it adds a few minutes to game time, so be it…most smart fans would rather see the right calls made.

I'm leaning your way, Dave.  I see your point, reb, you maybe don't want five challenges every inning.  But I think getting things right is the best, and adding even a couple more challenges would be advantageous.  I get the "save them for leverage" logic, but a lot of games swing with early-inning runs. 

To be honest, given how good the electronics seem to work, I still don't actually see the value of the challenge system?  Based on what I've read from the minor-league usage in past, the technology seems to work pretty consistently.  So we don't really need the challenge system for fear the technology will often fail.  Why not just go 100% robo-ump and skip the challenge system altogether?  Or is the concern that robo-ump will be too slow, or something, to make instant calls?  Assuming the robo-ump can read and decide as fast or faster than an ump, going full robo-ump could then both get ALL the calls right, and do so without wasting the extra few seconds on challenge?  Or is the concern that robo-ump is presently too slow for that? 

Based on what I've seen so far, it seems like teams are erring in the direction of not using all their challenges rather than using them too fast.

……..If it adds a few minutes to game time, so be it…most smart fans would rather see the right calls made.

I think most smart fans want to see the calls ruled favorably for the team that they root for—more so than the “right call” that went against their team.

If want perfection, why not have unlimited challenges or have the system call every pitch. Tried the latter in the minors and hardly anybody liked that. That’s why have the current system.

I don’t know the magic number for how many incorrect challenges a team should get but I would not like a system where we had a “have nothing to lose” mentality so let’s challenge. Should balance flow-of-the-game with any challenge system.

Main benefit of the pitch clock isn’t so much reducing length of games but rather improving flow of the game. Really important. A team can challenge pitch calls all game long if their challenges have merit but like having an incentive that it’s a worthy challenge and there’s a penalty if challenge lacks merit. Five incorrect challenges per team seems like a lot.

 Eventually they'll switch over to robo umps.  Until then I'm fine with the present system.