I read that probably in 2024, MLB will introduce Automated Ball-Strike technology into major league games.

I have mixed feelings. Something needs to be done to more standardize the strike zone because the umpiring has gotten totally out of hand on the strike zone in the last decade or so, not only in variation but in either shrinking the zone to where no one swings a bat or widening it to the point that hitters are flailing at everything. Both of which are a major cause of action on the field, and poor pace of game.

But I am not sure there is a better option from what I have read and heard about the systems being considered. If that statcast box on the TV screen is supposed to resemble the option of the computer actually calling balls and strikes, it seems prone to similar issues as it (1) is one dimensional when the actual strike zone is 3 dimensional; (2) it doesn't seem to change given the batter's height and stance; and (3) whether the "ball" actually touches the outside line of the box seems debatable, and there is where most major league pitchers are attempting to put the ball. And then you still have the did he swing or not issues. And I read an interesting article by a retired umpire on the nuances of how the pitcher sets up the batter, how the batter adjusts his batting stance, what the batter apprears to be trying to do all influence a good umpire's decision and will be lost.

So then you go to the other alternative being discussed where the automated computer ball/strike call is only used for instant replays with each team having a limited number of challenges. Instant replays on fielding plays already delay action enough, and it has taken how many seasons to get where it finally is being used more or less as originally intended to correct outrageously bad calls rather find nit picky little exceptions not readily visible in real time speed to the naked eye. Going through the same learning curve with ball/strike calls is painful to even think about.

A third option you don't hear as much about is a form of Pitch-Com tech where ball/strike is communicated from computer to ump as in the first option, but it is advisory and a suggestion to the ump rather than hardfast. Sort of a subliminal reigning in of the more extreme abuses of the strike zones by some umps. That combined with a limited number of replays -- since some ump will never be reigned in -- might work.

Its intresting in it self, but will take away from the game of sport, i would think 🤔

they introduced a video ref in the rugby league.
now instead of a free flowing game they send the decisions up to the video ref every 5 mins.. an 80 min game now takes 3 hrs.

oh. and there just happens to be a big fat KFC logo on screen each time we wait for the video ref to make a decision.

not like thats under contract to happen so many times per game .... right?. 🤬

Let the commissioner ruin the game more.

Good. Umps get worse each year.

I don't trust a computer.

Meh, havent been interested in baseball for almost 20 years now but i say let them try it out and see if it works