{"id":627719,"date":"2026-04-24T11:00:11","date_gmt":"2026-04-24T11:00:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/627719\/"},"modified":"2026-04-24T11:00:11","modified_gmt":"2026-04-24T11:00:11","slug":"what-could-the-nhl-learn-from-mlbs-new-abs-challenge-system","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/627719\/","title":{"rendered":"What could the NHL learn from MLB\u2019s new ABS challenge system?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here\u2019s a sentence you\u2019ve never seen me write before: Replay review is good.<\/p>\n

And a few more: Replay review works. It\u2019s doing what it\u2019s supposed to do. I\u2019m glad it\u2019s there, because it\u2019s making the game better.<\/p>\n

Just not in the NHL.<\/p>\n

Tomorrow will mark the one-month anniversary of Major League Baseball\u2019s introduction of the automated ball-strike system, also known as ABS and\/or our new robo-ump overlords. For the first time, balls and strikes can now be challenged<\/a>, subjecting the fundamental building block of the game to review.<\/p>\n

And it\u2019s working. It\u2019s working so well, in fact, that some fans and media are asking for more<\/a>.<\/p>\n

And then there\u2019s hockey. On Monday, the NHL served up a mess of a scenario in Carolina<\/a>, where an overtime goal was subjected to a long review despite nobody knowing exactly what was being looked at. The call was overturned, and when we eventually found out why, it turned out to be a judgment call based on an extremely ill-defined section of the rulebook<\/a>, one that didn\u2019t seem to be as \u201cclear and obvious\u201d as the rulebook demands.<\/p>\n

In other words, yet another NHL replay mess, one that ends with fans arguing over what the system is even supposed to do. Throw it on the pile<\/a>. The NHL has a system based on the holy tenet of \u201cjust get it right\u201d that never seems to get it right, at least not to everyone\u2019s satisfaction. As I\u2019ve written before, nobody thinks this is working<\/a>.<\/p>\n

And sure, you\u2019ve heard this before, from me and many others, plenty of times. Maybe you\u2019re numb to it by now.<\/p>\n

And then, here comes MLB with its fancy new replay system, and everyone loves it. That suggests the problem here can\u2019t be that the entire concept of replay review is bad. It seems like it can indeed work. The devil is in the details.<\/p>\n

OK. So instead of just complaining about the NHL\u2019s broken system, let\u2019s look at a better one and see if there\u2019s anything we can learn. Here are seven reasons why baseball\u2019s ABS seems to be working so well, and whether there are any lessons we could apply to improving hockey\u2019s review system.<\/p>\n

Reason 1: ABS is fast<\/p>\n

No, really. If you\u2019re not a baseball fan and haven\u2019t seen the ABS system in action, you might be caught off-guard by how fast it works<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The system cuts out all the pageantry we\u2019re used to seeing when replay is invoked, in hockey and just about every other sport. There\u2019s no consulting with the bench. No officials huddling up and putting on headphones. No time for the broadcast to sort through multiple replays and try to guess the result while we wait patiently for a verdict.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a challenge, and then there\u2019s a result. It\u2019s about as close to instant as you could imagine a system being. And that means that as far as disrupting the flow of the game, ABS is basically within a rounding error to no impact at all.<\/p>\n

The lesson: Get it over with.<\/p>\n

Could it work in the NHL?\u00a0Not in the same way. Balls and strikes are simple, at least compared to the mysteries of goalie interference<\/a>. Even on relatively straightforward calls, such as offside or whether a puck crossed the goal line, you\u2019re just never going to get a review done in seconds. That\u2019s not realistic.<\/p>\n

What is possible, though, is for the NHL to learn the bigger lesson here, which is that shorter reviews are better. One of the biggest complaints from hockey fans is that the reviews often feel like they take forever, which kills the game\u2019s momentum and sucks the life out of the building.<\/p>\n

The NHL might not be able to replicate the incredible speed of an ABS review, but it can look at its success as a reminder to always be asking: What can we do to make this process faster?<\/p>\n

Reason 2: ABS is automated<\/p>\n

How is ABS so fast? One reason is that once a challenge happens, there\u2019s no room for human subjectivity. Instead, we get a quick 3D rendering that instantly reveals the result. You could argue it\u2019s not even a replay review at all, because the robots aren\u2019t watching replays. They don\u2019t need to.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not quite perfect \u2014 the system occasionally isn\u2019t available<\/a>, and there\u2019s still a very small margin for error<\/a>. But perfection should be the goal; improvement is.<\/p>\n

The lesson: If you don\u2019t trust the human factor, take it out completely.<\/p>\n

Could it work in the NHL? Not yet. And not at all for certain types of challenges \u2014 again, goalie interference will just never work with any kind of ABS-inspired system, which is yet another reason why we shouldn\u2019t have it at all<\/a>.<\/p>\n

But when it comes to a puck being over a line, and perhaps offside and high sticks, it\u2019s not hard to imagine a world where hockey could use its puck and player tracking to get the same sort of automated result we see in baseball (and other sports<\/a>).<\/p>\n

When that day arrives, the NHL should move as quickly as it can. An automated system will need to be tested and maybe tweaked, but once it\u2019s ready, get it on the ice.<\/p>\n

Reason 3: ABS doesn\u2019t do judgment calls<\/p>\n

If the ball catches any piece of the strike zone, it\u2019s a strike. If not, it\u2019s a ball. We\u2019re not making judgment calls or opinions, and certainly not game management.<\/p>\n

The lesson: Replay works on objective, yes-or-no calls \u2026 and not necessarily anything else.<\/p>\n

Could it work in the NHL?\u00a0I don\u2019t know, everyone seems really thrilled<\/a> with how the almost entirely subjective interference reviews are going, right?<\/p>\n

Reason 4: ABS is easy to understand<\/p>\n

We can\u2019t give baseball much credit, because the whole concept of balls and strikes is relatively straightforward and hard to mess up. (We\u2019ll pause here so you can all get your C.B. Bucknor jokes in<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

That simplicity is an advantage that baseball has over hockey, where everything moves so much faster and the plays don\u2019t happen in discrete chunks. We can complain about hockey\u2019s replay system all we want, but let\u2019s acknowledge that the degree of difficulty is nowhere near the same.<\/p>\n

That said, it\u2019s hard to watch an ABS challenge play out in front of 40,000 fans who all seem to understand exactly what\u2019s going on without comparing it to a typical NHL review. If we\u2019re lucky, a referee might mumble something into a broken microphone to give us some hint about what\u2019s being looked at. More often, we\u2019re all guessing \u2014 fans, media, broadcasters, all of us. In that Hurricanes overtime, nobody even figured out which part of the play was at issue until it was too late. There\u2019s no defending that.<\/p>\n

The lesson: It\u2019s crucially important that fans understand exactly what\u2019s happening and why.<\/p>\n

Could it work in the NHL? Again, not anywhere near as easily as it does with ABS. That\u2019s clear.\u00a0But the bigger lesson here still applies: Fans need to understand what\u2019s being reviewed. And when the call is made, they need to understand that too. The NFL is a closer comparison, and they typically do a good job communicating about most reviews. Not a great job, mind you, and certainly not an infallible one. But better than hockey? By a mile.<\/p>\n

If the NHL is going to go on having this much replay review, the very least they can do is insist that referees make a clear announcement about what\u2019s being looked at, and then another about what they saw and why it did or didn\u2019t change the call on the ice. If the refs hate that, too bad. This part of the job is too important to keep messing it up as badly as the NHL does.<\/p>\n

Reason 5: ABS is \u2026 kind of fun?<\/p>\n

I didn\u2019t see this part coming, but as a fan, I kind of like ABS reviews. Not the concept \u2014 I mean the actual review, where the ump announces a challenge and then you get to sit back and watch that little animation that pops up on the TV (and simultaneously on the ballpark scoreboard). It\u2019s super fast, but you still get that brief moment of suspense. And hearing the crowd react in real time as they see what you\u2019re seeing is a nice touch.<\/p>\n

The lesson: Sports are still entertainment.<\/p>\n

Could it work in the NHL? Yes, in two ways. First, when we eventually get that tracking technology in place for certain cut-and-dry reviews, let\u2019s copy the baseball approach. Let\u2019s see a little animation of a zone entry, with the camera zooming in on whichever player\u2019s skate is in question. Have the blade turn green if they\u2019re OK, red if they\u2019re offside.<\/p>\n

But the bigger point here is to never forget the fun factor. Hockey is serious business. But it\u2019s all for fun. The NHL is an entertainment product. And the next time some sore-loser GM tries to insist that we absolutely need a new type of review for whatever obscure rules scenario he thinks his team got detrimentally affected by most recently, the league should ask itself: Would this make our product more fun, or less?<\/p>\n

Reason 6: ABS doesn\u2019t wait around<\/p>\n

This is maybe my favorite wrinkle of baseball\u2019s system. And luckily, it\u2019s the easiest one to borrow for the NHL.<\/p>\n

To initiate a review, the pitcher, catcher or hitter must signal their challenge immediately. Practically speaking, that translates to a few seconds. That\u2019s it. There\u2019s no standing around, and certainly no waiting for the broadcast to show a few replays first.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s another key detail about ABS, and you may have caught it in the last paragraph: The challenges can only come from pitchers, catchers and hitters \u2014 not from the bench. In fact, if a player even looks over to the bench for some guidance, the umpire can deny their challenge.<\/p>\n

Needless to say, baseball teams do not have video coaches sitting in a room somewhere desperately clicking through tape for anything that looks like a do-over. And they don\u2019t feel the need to grind the game to a halt after every close call, just in case somebody somewhere might want to challenge.<\/p>\n

The lesson: You think the official missed a call? Say so, right away, so we can get a review done quickly. Speak now or forever hold your peace.<\/p>\n

Could it work in the NHL?: To an extent, absolutely. I\u2019m not sure if hockey should borrow the entire concept and make challenges the exclusive domain of players on the ice, although I\u2019m open to being convinced. But the current way of doing things, where everyone is constantly standing around, waiting for a coach to finish staring at an iPad or hear from a video guy who\u2019s literally the only person in an entire building who noticed a play was offside? It\u2019s awful.<\/p>\n

In the past, I\u2019ve suggested that coaches get exactly five seconds after a goal to challenge. The referee in the offensive zone signals a goal, and the trailing ref turns to the bench of the team that was just scored on and holds up five fingers. Count it down, then demand a yes or no. Are you not sure yet? Too late, good goal.<\/p>\n

That would virtually spell the end of the video coaches and the iPads. It would speed the game up. And most importantly of all, it would (over time) retrain fans to get fully excited about goals again, without that lingering \u201cWait, maybe this will all get called back, I\u2019d better wait before I celebrate too much\u201d feeling we all know so well.<\/p>\n

Is that the best way to do it? I think so, but I could be wrong. The key point here is to be fast, be clear and treat challenges as rare events for obvious misses, not some sort of default setting for nitpicking. If the ump misses a strike but the catcher and pitcher do too, well, that\u2019s baseball, isn\u2019t it? And if nobody watching a play in real time noticed a missed stoppage on the rink, we shouldn\u2019t care what some freeze-frame pixel tells us 10 minutes later.<\/p>\n

Reason 7: ABS is still new<\/p>\n

Now that I\u2019ve spent most of this column pumping the tires of a different sport and dumping on the NHL, we should end with an important dose of reality: ABS is brand-new at the MLB level. It\u2019s very possible that over time, as teams and players get used to the new system, problems will emerge.<\/p>\n

When it comes to hockey and replay review, the law of unintended consequences is pretty much undefeated. Maybe baseball falls victim as well and at some point down the line, we look back at pieces like this and wonder how anyone ever thought ABS was working.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s largely what happened with offside review, after all. Matt Duchene went offside by 10 feet, the officials missed it, we all agreed that of course we didn\u2019t want to see that happen again, and replay review seemed like an obvious fix to the problem. Did you object at the time? I don\u2019t think I did.<\/p>\n

It wasn\u2019t until the system had been around for a while that we realized we\u2019d messed up. In the decade since offside review came into effect, we\u2019ve yet to catch even a single Duchene-level miss. Instead, teams have turned the rule into a get-out-of-jail-free card to be used against goals that would never have been considered controversial for the first century of NHL history.<\/p>\n

Maybe something like that, or worse, ends up happening in baseball. We\u2019ll find out.<\/p>\n

The lesson: Don\u2019t go hanging \u201cmission accomplished\u201d banners just because something works for the first few weeks.<\/p>\n

Could it work in the NHL?\u00a0Wait, is this a reason to kick the can down the road and choose the status quo over something that could be better? Now we\u2019re talking the NHL\u2019s language.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Here\u2019s a sentence you\u2019ve never seen me write before: Replay review is good. And a few more: Replay…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":627720,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[558],"tags":[64,63,591,575,85],"class_list":["post-627719","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-mlb","tag-au","tag-australia","tag-mlb","tag-nhl","tag-sports"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/627719","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=627719"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/627719\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/627720"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=627719"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=627719"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=627719"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}