Would MLB Be Right in Banning the 'Third-to-First' Pickoff Move?

Part of what makes baseball such a great game is the historical aspect that comes along with it every time players take to the field.

Sure, there have been a number of subtle changes to the game since its inception hundreds of years ago, but for the most part, the fundamentals of the game have remained the same.

That's part of the reason that it comes as somewhat of a surprise that the league is moving in the direction of banning the third-to-first pickoff move that pitchers utilize from time to time, making the move a balk effective next season.

As it stands right now, rule 8.05(C) reads as follows:

"

It is possible, with runners on first and third, for the pitcher to step toward third and not throw, merely to bluff the runner back to third; then seeing the runner on first start for second, turn and step toward and throw to first base. This is legal.

"

Under the revised rule, a pitcher couldn't fake to third base without stepping off the rubber first.

An argument could be made that the third-to-first move gives certain pitchers an unfair advantage, since left-handed pitchers obviously can't utilize the move in the same way that a right-handed pitcher could.

By the time that claim came out of your mouth, though, you'd have a right-handed pitcher noting that a lefty has the natural advantage when it comes to holding a runner on first base.

Furthermore, given the success rate of the move, it's hard to believe that a pitcher is really under the impression they'll pick a runner off. After all, how often does that move actually fool someone on base?

There is also a relatively valid argument that the pace of play has been adversely effected (in part) by the move, as some pitchers spend a great deal of time doing things other than throwing the ball to the catcher, something that can frustrate fans and players alike.

Right or wrong, it is somewhat of a mystery as to why the league would spend the effort in trying to outlaw this move, when there are clearly other issues in the game that seem to need more attention.

Take instant replay for example. As mentioned earlier, pace of play has been a concern around the league, with games oftentimes stretching well beyond three hours. Implementing expanded instant replay would most certainly stretch out games even further depending on how much action the league decided to take.

For all the time it adds to a game, however, getting the call right is the most important thing, which is why the league has taken baby steps to welcome some instant replay into the game—namely home run calls.

As has always been the case with baseball, the pitcher controls most aspects of the game, so even though it may seem like a no-brainer to remove a play that's rarely successfully executed, taking the ability to manage base runners away (at least in part) seems like a change that could be met with opposition.

In the end, the league will do what it wants to when it comes to changing America's pastime, but the commissioner's office needs to think long and hard about priorities in that respect, as the game has thrived for multiple centuries without many tweaks and could very well do the same without further modifications.