Good morning. Today, with the baseball season just a few days away, we’ll explain a technological change that’s about to transform the sport.
Pitch perfect
The foundations of baseball have largely remained the same since Babe Ruth swung a bat. Nine innings make a game. Three strikes and you’re out. And the ultimate authority on all pitches is the home plate umpire. We won’t be able to say that last one in a few days. On Wednesday, when the San Francisco Giants’ starter tosses out the first pitch of the Major League Baseball season, players will — for the first time — have the chance to overrule the umpire’s call of a ball or a strike. The new higher power will be a network of specialized cameras set up in every ballpark to track the baseball’s exact location. It’s officially called the Automated Ball-Strike (A.B.S.) Challenge System. Many fans call it the robot ump. It’s a major change for a sport steeped so deeply in tradition, and some players have expressed reservations. But baseball officials insist that the A.B.S. system will help rid the game of something that even traditionalists despise: bad calls. How it works
Teams will begin every game with two challenges — opportunities to summon the robot umpire and see whether the human behind home plate missed a ball or strike call. If a challenge is successful, the team can use it again. After two misses, though, it loses the power altogether. Only the pitcher, catcher or batter can challenge a call, and they have to do so almost immediately, without help from teammates or coaches. The signal is a tap on the head, which effectively tells the ump: I think you’re wrong. A few seconds later, a graphic appears on the outfield screen showing whether the pitch was in fact a ball or a strike. Fans might find the whole charade a bit strange on television. But when I witnessed the A.B.S. system in person, at a few spring training games this month in Florida, I was surprised by how much tension it introduced to the stadium. People looked up from their phones, and the crowd collectively held its breath awaiting the results. Once, when the screen showed that the human behind the plate was correct — the pitch had indeed been a ball, by just a fraction of an inch — a fan couldn’t help but shout to the umpire how impressed he was. It may have been the first time that ump had heard a compliment from the bleachers. How fans and players feelM.L.B. officials say polls suggest that fans overwhelmingly support the challenge system, and my experience backed that up. Of the roughly two dozen I spoke to at spring training, nearly all said they liked the A.B.S. system, or at least were not against it. Only two, a father and son, disliked it. It wasn’t so much the challenge system they objected to, but rather the creeping intrusion of technology into the sport.
Players’ opinions have been a bit more mixed, though many say they’re open to giving it a shot. Catchers, in particular, have been interesting to hear from, because some have made a living by fooling umpires using a technique known as framing — where they shift their gloves and their bodies to make borderline pitches look more like strikes. The Giants’ Patrick Bailey, widely considered the best defensive catcher in the game, initially worried that A.B.S. would devalue his skills. But he now says he’s excited to see how he and other catchers can take advantage of the system. During spring training, catchers proved far better than batters at deciding when to call for the robot to step in. Bailey has been among the best, winning 10 of his first 12 challenges. What’s next?If robot umps are here to stay, does that mean that human umps are on the road to extinction? It’s a reasonable question, especially since tennis, which uses the same exact camera technology as A.B.S., has replaced line judges entirely at most major tournaments. Baseball officials seem open to the idea. They have tested fully automated strike-calling in the minor leagues, and the M.L.B. commissioner, Rob Manfred, has described the challenge system as a “first step.” But a vast majority of the minor-leaguers who tried both systems told M.L.B. that they opposed full automation. And a survey by my colleagues at The Athletic found similar results with big-leaguers. Remember the father and son I spoke to during spring training? Many players agree with them: They want the game’s human touch to be preserved. “Can we just play baseball?” the star pitcher Max Scherzer once asked my colleague Jayson Stark. “We’re humans. Can we just be judged by humans?” For more
The Middle East
Politics
Around the World
Other Big Stories
What will Trump’s legacy be on the war in Iran? A strong leader. Trump is the only president who took the Iranian threat seriously and acted on it, Hugh Hewitt of Fox News writes: “He is the sort of tough and indeed ruthless commander in chief the U.S. needs to put away its enemies, not merely put them in timeout.” A careless leader. Trump has put U.S. allies in the region at risk of more retaliations from Iran, The Guardian’s editorial board writes. “It remains unclear what precisely the Trump administration expected from this conflict — perhaps not least to the White House itself — but it is certain that the president was not paying heed when people described the likely consequences.”
Trump has lied about the war in Iran, the editorial board writes: “Presidents owe American service members and their families the truth about why they are being asked to fight.” Here is a column by Nicholas Kristof on a better usage of the money spent on the war in Iran. Morning readers: Save on the complete Times experience. Experience all of The Times, all in one subscription — all with this introductory offer. You’ll gain unlimited access to news and analysis, plus games, recipes, product reviews and more.
Phony fiction: Publishers have few guardrails to stop themselves from unwittingly publishing A.I.-generated novels. It already seems to be happening. Influencing: Fidel Castro’s grandson has built an Instagram following with skits that subtly take a dig at the government while flaunting his lavish lifestyle. Take a break: A workaholic mother realized that she had taught her son how to work hard but not how to relax. Could they actually take a vacation? Jailhouse lawyer: Obsessed with proving his innocence, Quentin Lewis devoted years in isolation to learning the law. Now he is taking on his captors.
Men’s college basketball: Texas stunned Gonzaga to reach the Sweet 16. Nebraska and Arkansas also escaped close calls to advance. Women’s college basketball: Clemson fell to the University of Southern California in overtime after a contentious no-call at the end of regulation.
“You With the Sad Eyes,” by Christina Applegate: Applegate, the Emmy-winning star of “Married … with Children” and “Dead to Me,” has long been known as a fast-talking funny girl. But as the title of this best-selling memoir indicates, “You With the Sad Eyes” is unlikely to be accompanied by a laugh track. The book focuses on Applegate’s first three decades and includes multiple accounts of abuse, beginning when she was 5 years old. As Applegate said in an interview: “I went to work and it was funny. But I went home and — not funny.” Her book also manages to be dishy and amusing, full of candid observations about Gen X co-stars and what it’s like to live with multiple sclerosis. Applegate proves to be a survivor on multiple fronts and a singular voice worth hearing. More on books
|
