Quote:
Originally posted by mbcrowder
Don't know about y'all, but that sounds like the definition of "influence" to me...
|
Influence is described as "A power affecting a person, thing, or course of events, especially one that operates without any direct or apparent effort." I think the way the question was posed one might conclude the umpire would be "fooled" by the framing of the catcher without effort. I think calling balls and strikes is part art (Questec induced automatic officiating) as well as science. The PU can use the catcher's ability to "sell" calls most of which would be strikes without any catcher's efforts. Obviously there are going to be clear "balls" that the catcher tries to "frame". In those cases he best not be painting the picture too long i.e. get the ball back to the pitcher. Jim/NYC