Picture a sizzling fastball, a blur of action, and then… a robot’s decision. Not a human umpire, but a machine determining the destiny of a pitch. Welcome to the age of ABS (Automated Ball Strike) technology, where a $3.8 million arm shakes his head in disbelief.

The latest Red Sox All-Star, Garrett Crochet, recently found out just how wild this ride can be.

The stage for man versus machine was set at Clearwater, Florida. And Crochet, a self-described doubter of robotic umpires, was thrown into the fray. “I’m not a huge fan of [ABS]. I like to think human error is part of the game,” Crochet said after a particularly wild second inning against the Phillies.

When he missed a 2-2 pitch to Brandon Marsh and the robotic umpire called it a ball, he fought to contain himself. “[When the pitch was called a ball], I was like, ‘No, no, that was off the plate]. He’s called that pitch a ball four times already.’ “

Then the unexpected occurred. Catcher Seby Zavala lodged a challenge, and the ABS system disclosed a truth: Crochet’s cutter had brushed the zone. THAT’S STRIKE OUT!

Crochet was shaken to his core.“I was like, ‘Are you kidding?’” he chuckled.

“Maybe this (ABS) is a good idea.” Yeah, even the most adamant opponents can commend the object of their scorn.

Yet the ABS rollercoaster went on.

Zavala contested another call, a 3-2 ball, but this time, the machine upheld the human umpire. Marcelo Mayer then entered the fray. The umpire called the ball for a 2-1 pitch; the Phillies contested the call, and it was upheld. What’s the next pitch? A STRIKE! Mayer argued, and the robot overturned the decision, giving him a bases-loaded walk.

Mayer joined Crochet in laughter, knowing that both pitches were only a few inches outside the zone.

ABS in action: A spring training rollercoaster

Crochet isn’t the only one who feels ABS speaks a different language.“You get used to a certain zone,” says Chris Sale, another Red Sox pitcher, “then the robot says no.” Even sharpshooters often get frustrated in that “phantom zone.” According to Sale, it’s not perfection that matters, but consistency.

But as per Baseball Prospectus, such tiny differences add up. 

Remember Zavala disputing that call? And that’s the new reality. “Framing used to be an art,” says Mike Piazza, “now it feels pointless.” And Statcast confirms this: There’s less room for framing.

“My focus has shifted to pitch calling and blocking balls. I can focus more on the pitcher, and less on trying to steal a strike,” says Connor Wong, catcher for the Red Sox. A paradigm shift in catching strategy and perhaps the loss of a subtle art. No question, it’s a game-changer for catchers.

Imagine Alex Cora, a strategic mastermind, hesitating: “Do I risk it?” So that’s the mental game now. And the challenge rates vary, adding to the pressure.

“Robot says right or wrong,” Rafael Devers exclaims. It’s not about disputing with the ump; it’s about believing the algorithm. And that changes everything.

“Baseball has always been a game of imperfections,” says veteran MLB player David Ortiz, “That’s part of what makes it beautiful. Are we willing to sacrifice that for perfect accuracy?” Ortiz, who loves the game’s traditions, has expressed concern that the game may one day become completely automated.

“I understand the desire for fairness,” says Joe West, a former Major League Baseball umpire. “But I worry that we’re losing something special. The human element is what makes baseball so great.”

But this spring training clash was no mere tech demo. When the Phillies scored five runs against the Red Sox relievers in the final innings, it was a reminder that the human factor—mistakes, miracles, and everything in between—still exists in baseball. Yet it’s Crochet’s story—from skeptic to bewildered convert—that’s attracting the most attention.

In this age-old game of tradition versus technology, even the most experienced players are in for a wild and unpredictable ride. But which side would you take—man or machine?