I truly get both points here. On the one hand I totally agree the pitcher is on the hook. And therefore should be in command. Similar to a recent thread about who was in charge catcher or pitcher. I say it's the pitcher. OTOH it is the coaches job to coach. If the coach feels strongly about a pitch the pitcher needs to throw it. That's the way life works. Ever work in corporate America? When some less than brilliant middle manager comes up with an idea the lower ranks have to use it no matter how inane it is. Obviously as I stated earlier in the thread it is best when coach, pitcher and catcher all sit together and discuss. Catchers input pretty much stops at what pitches seem to be working and how those pitches are being located. Then coach and pitcher based on this input come up with a plan of attack. Catcher then follows the plan. Understand pitchers need to control his game. But also think of this, if the pitcher wants to consider himself good shouldn't he be able to throw any pitch at any time? If he is not strong and confident regardless of what the coach calls maybe he shouldn't be a pitcher. So I see both sides but the development issue I can't buy. Cause the fact of the matter is the catcher is likely never at any level to have full control. And the pitcher will have to reach the highest levels and with great results to have that kind of freedom. So what would you be developing them for?